Posted on 09/08/2001 4:00:51 PM PDT by dogbyte12
He was having an adulterous affair with Chandra Levy. According to her friend Sven Jones, Chandra was pressuring Condit into leaving his wife Carolyn, and marrying her. Now more mistresses have come forward with the rule Chandra revealed to her aunt. She was not allowed to carry ID with her when she went out on a date with Condit. Condit's wife gets migraine headaches at time that are often triggered by high altitude airline flights, so she tries to avoid flying.
It had been a year since Carolyn Condit flew to Washington. She flies to Washington on April 28th, and stays there until May 4th, the exact time when Gary Condit's mistress dissapears. Congress was in session on May 1st, and Condit's wife was in town. To go outside without a cell phone would mean that Chandra Levy could possibly miss the 5-15 minute chance that day of Condit contacting her. She goes downstairs and buys a paper, if Condit calls her cell phone, she may have to wait another day until she gets another chance for a conversation with him. If everything was fine with Chandra and Gary Condit, there is no reasonable explanation for her to leave her cell phone home unless she was going out with him.
There are some who theorize that the no ID would be due to Chandra going down to the laundry room, or just grabbing change and buying a paper. Well since she read the papers online, skip the papers. If Chandra was going to spend an hour down in the laundry room, her cell phone would have gone with her, so she could talk with Gary or whomever decided to call her. She was also expecting return calls from Sven Jones and from Aunt Linda to find out what her "big news" was going to be. She would take the cell phone with her anywhere except a date with Gary. Aunt Linda and Sven could wait, only IF she was with Gary.
Gary Condit did not attempt to call Chandra Levy during the week she came up missing. The excuse that his wife was in town and couldn't find time to call his mistress is false, because he found a chance every single day that week to call Anne Marie Smith. In August, he reveals to Connie Chung that he may have tried calling her on the "31st of April (sic), but there is no proof of that attempted phone call being made. He also tells Connie Chung that he didn't really attempt to call Chandra because she was on a train. How ludicrous is that? For one, the woman has a cell phone. It even can work on trains. Even if she was out of range when he tried, there should be records of attempts being made. There are not. He did not inform the parents that Chandra was almost certainly going to be on the train. The parents thought it was one of several options, and certainly would not expect Chandra to take a train, without telling her when she left, or when they were supposed to pick her up at the train station. This excuse holds no water at all.
There is some speculation as to if Chandra and Condit had some other method of communication other than her home phone number or regular cell phone. Condit and Chandra's phone activity died out during the week or two before she vanished. Yet, originally Condit was claiming through aides, that he "broke off his friendship" with Chandra on the 29th (the day after his wife arrived in town), and that Chandra made a flurry of calls to him that day and the 30th, which he didn't return. No records of those calls. No record of the call he claims to have made on "the 31st or May 1st or 2nd"
Was there a hint of truth in this? Did Condit get Chandra a special cell phone? i.e. the type you can get at 7-11 for $89 with pre-paid phone cards. Knowing Condit's penchant for using fake names, he could have registered one in a false name, handed it to Chandra, and called her from pay phones. This is intriguing because either Condit was telling the truth earlier, about him dumping her, or there had to be another phone contact method. There aren't a pattern of calls from Condit to Chandra or from Chandra to Condit the last few weeks before she vanished. Yet Anne Marie and Condit were still talking nearly every day. What was going on? Chandra by Condit's own admission was overnighting at his Condo on April 24th, yet there weren't calls the day before, or the day before that between the two according to Chandra's cell phone record So did she just show up, or did she have another phone?
Condit finally releases a timeline on June 28th that is full of either mistakes or outright lies. It insinuates that Condit met with VP Cheney for 3 hours when the meeting lasted under 1/2 hour. You do not mistake those times. You might be confused if the meeting last 50 minutes or an hour, but not 25 minutes and 3 hours. He lied by omission. He said he met with Cheney at 12:30 and returned to the office at 3:30, hinting that he returned as soon as the meeting was over.
Condit also stated that he met with Rebecca Cooper from ABC news from 6:30-7:30PM. He actually met her around 2:30PM the next afternoon, not on the first for about 3 hours. It's funny... one day Condit is making a 25 minute meeting 3 hours, the next time he is shortening a 3 hour meeting to 1 hour and moving it up a day.
Condit on June 28th had his phone bills from May 1st. His office had a record of every meeting scheduled, every visitor who came in to meet with the congressman, every staff meeting, etc. They had full access to all the data needed to prove Gary Condit was in the office. The fact that they state he returned at 3:30PM tends to show that they had no evidence of him being at the office before then. Let's do a little logic here. If Condit met with Cheney til 1PM, went to his office immediately afterwards, and took phone calls, met visitors, staggered through out the period of 1PM to 3:30PM, why wouldn't they tell us? There is no reason to hide the fact that he was actually working. The ONLY reason that the staff, in receipt of all documentary evidence, would tell us that Condit didn't return until 3:30PM, is because he wasn't there.
Condit's timeline also keeps repeating that a staff member picks up Condit, or a staff member drives Carolyn Condit because Condit didn't have access to a car in Washington. This is what he told the police as well. The police find out in July, only through Anne Marie Smith that Condit actually took her out on dates in the red ford that he had a set of keys to, as well as his staff.
We know that the Levy parents arrive late on May 15th to Washington D.C. The next day, they meet with the police and hold a press conference. The local tv networks flash Chandra's picture all over the evening news casts that evening of the 16th. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer meet with Bob and Sue Levy to help publicize their case, but Condit doesn't. While the Levy parents are still in town on May 17th, Condit does the morning roll call vote, then misses votes for the first time this session. 3 votes between 10 and 3PM are scheduled, and Condit doesn't participate. Anne Marie Smith in the meantime, checks into her hotel in D.C. after flying out there on an airline route. She calls Condit up on his secret phone line, and doesn't get a return call until Midnight from Luray, Va... 80 miles south and about a 2 hour drive from Washington D.C. She claims that he said "he might be in trouble."
Since then, Gary Condit has acted like a suspect. He has hired a criminal lawyer, when if it was just an affair he was covering up, it wouldn't be a legal matter, more a PR problem. He does hire a PR guru as well. Close contacts with Chandra Levy, such as Sven Jones, take police administered polygraphs. Condit refuses. The police leak that they are more than happy to limit the questions to Chandra Levy, and add no questions about Joleen Mckay/the watchbox/ and Anne Marie Smith. No dice. He takes a 4 question polygraph administered by an expert who is under no obligation to tell us if this was the first or the 21st polygraph that Condit took with him. This same expert also "cleared" Ron Carey, who is currently on trial.
There is "no proof" that Gary Condit did it. There is no proof he didn't either. You would think that 4 months later with all this scrutiny, he would have been cleared by now. If not by the police, if not by the media, at least by his lawyer. If Condit can prove his whereabouts during May 1st and 2nd, and can pass a police polygraph which shows he has no clue as to what happened to Chandra Levy, are we to believe that he is paying Abbe Lowell $400-$600 an hour, letting his career go down into tatters, just to do what exactly? The hiding affairs excuse doesn't fly anymore. EVERYBODY KNOWS.
Condit is hurting himself by acting this way. If he could prove his whereabouts and prove his truth through a polygraph, at least prove it to the police, he could make this almost all go away. The fact that he is destroying his career, when every single day there are about 50 lawyers, PR people spelling out to him, as if he didn't know, how to make this go away, and Condit still refuses to stop self-destructing his career tells us there is something there.
It's been a while since anybody has summarized the case in total about why Gary Condit looks guilty, so I thought I would give it a crack. Any feedback, or suggestions would be appreciated, I plan to fine tune this and email it to any folks in the media who feel bored and feel there are no angles left to cover. The media still haven't addressed clearly just the basics of May 1st. I have not seen one person other than Mike Dayton who has verified Condit's whereabouts the afternoon of May 1st after the Cheney meeting. I am incredulous that the media has not tried to get at least 1 person who showed up at Condit's office, an outsider, between 1PM and 3:30PM. In that 150 minute span, some outsider had to go to his office. So what happened when they got there?
Initially he might have thought, "well, I can't admit that because I would sound so callous, and no one will ever believe I had anything to do with her disappearance anyway, so I'll just stonewall."
This, to me, is a possible scenario wherein Condit didn't have anything to do with Chandra after a date certain (say the 24th if that's when the records stop), and had nothing at all to do with her disappearance.
Do I believe it? No. It is inconceivable to me that he would continue to stonewall, allow his children to lose their high-paying jobs, subject himself and his wife to the implacable scrutiny of the media following them 24/7 if he had nothing to do with Chandra's disappearance.
But Gary Condit has proved that he is no "rocket scientist." In fact, he seems to be uniquely stupid for someone in elected office. Way back in college I read an existential novel (Camus' "The Stranger" I believe) where someone who had no connection with his mother's death allows himself to be thought guilty of it due to essentially his inertia and ennui -- a total unwillingness to exert himself enough to fight back because he couldn't conceive that people would actually think him guilty of something he did not do. Could Condit be a Camus-like figure?
At any rate, this is more of a "thought experiment" than anything I could actually believe because I truly believe that Condit is 100% GUILTY!
There are so many odd coincidences there that all converged at the exact same point in time, culminating in the permanant disappearance of Chandra Levy.
I've fiddled around with making a list of them. It's a long list, and it's far from complete.
My question is did Carolyn Condit have Chandra killed? Did she do it herself and get somebody to clean up for her? Is the entire family so defensive of Gary Condit because they know that he really didn't kill Chandra, but rather is covering for the little woman? He wouldn't dare point the finger at her at this point considering he was a lying, cheating, scum of the earth husband. Or could she have forced the issue and demanded that Gary get rid of her. I keep thinking about her picture on the cover of People Magazine. That was not the picture of a sad or embarassed/humiliated woman. That was the picture of an angry woman who possibly? had just gotten her pound of flesh. To me her face was saying, "Don't screw with me"!
Don't get me wrong, Condit is pond scum at best and needs to be removed from office. He certainly would have been responsible for the circumstances that led up to her disappearance. My mind just keeps going back to Carolyn for some reason and I keep thinking she is deep in the middle of all of this and that's possibly why the kids et all seem to have no remorse over how Gary Condit treated her. They blame her for his fall from grace & power. When Gary said to Anne Marie, "You won't believe what they're trying to do to me." Could he have been referring to Carolyn and whoever helped her?
If Gary Condit thought he could point the finger at his wife, and people would believe it, he would do it in a heartbeat - whether she did it or not - in order to save his selfish butt!
Inquiring minds want to know.
That is very perceptive. Good job.
You have put it all together in an excellent chronological progression, I thought he was in on it before, now he has gone from a possible suspect to a certain suspect.
If you aren't a cop, you should be!
Doesn't the fact that she left ONLY with her keys indicate that she was picked up by Condit or by someone she knew who was taking her to Condit (or said he/she was taking her to Condit)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.