First Woman President Cartoons

Court ruling in murder of intern Chandra Levy reignites speculation on sensational Washington story

Charges dismissed against man convicted in Levy's death

It will again fuel the speculation. The wonder. The whispers.
The conjecture may not be fair. But it will inevitably happen.
A decision by Washington D.C. Superior Court Judge Robert Morin to “dismiss without prejudice” the murder conviction of Ingmar Guandique is likely to foster enduring chatter theory, which hasn’t dissipated in the nation’s capital in 15 years.
In 2010, the feds convicted Guandique -- an undocumented immigrant from El Salvador -- in the murder of then 24-year-old Washington intern Chandra Levy nine years earlier. Now prosecutors appealed to the court to drop the conviction as the court prepared for a retrial this fall because their case against Guandique crumbled.
The U.S. Attorney told the court that his office “could no longer prove the murder case against Mr. Guandique beyond a reasonable doubt.” Prosecutors based their conviction on the testimony of what later proved to be an unreliable informant who coughed up information from the slammer.
Prosecutors halted their efforts against Guandique following the revelation of an illegally-taped conversation between gang leader Armando Morales and bit-part actress Babs Proller.
Morales’s information was key in the conviction of Guandique. Morales and Proller got to know each other when they were neighbors. Proller’s recording purportedly reveals he lied on the witness stand during Guandique’s 2010 trial, which earned him a 60-year sentence for murdering Levy.
" 'Homeboy, I killed that bitch, but I didn’t rape her,’ ” Morales testified in court about what Guandique told him about Levy. Morales asked for installation in the government’s witness protection program for his testimony.
“It is now clear that the jailhouse informant, who was central to the government case, was a perjurer who too easily manipulated the prosecutors,” said Guandique’s attorneys.
And so, the question today is the same as it was 15 years ago: Who killed Chandra Levy?
The disappearance and murder of Levy has and always will be a Capitol Hill story. That’s because at the time of Levy’s death, she was having an affair with then-Rep. Gary Condit, D-Calif.
Carnival atmospheres frequently descend on Capitol Hill: Donald Trump meeting with House and Senate Republicans as he did a few weeks ago. A lineup of baseball stars like Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa appearing at a hearing on doping. Bono and Alicia Keys cruising through the Capitol’s marble corridors in an effort to secure funding for AIDS research.
But no one has seen a journalism jamboree like the one that unfolded around Condit in the spring and summer of 2001. The Levy case engrossed the entire press corps. News crews from around the world encamped on the Capitol.
Reporters staked out Condit’s office. They stalked him near the House gym in the Rayburn House Office Building. They pursued him in and out at the House Agriculture Committee. They waited at all hours for Condit at his home in Washington’s Adams-Morgan neighborhood. They even hung out in front of the home of his chief of staff in the Washington suburb of Alexandria, Va.
There were no suspects in the Levy case. But Condit was eerily mute. His quiet fomented disquiet. What did he know? What did he do? Did he do anything?
Prosecutors called Condit to testify in the 2010 Guandique case. When Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Haines presented Condit in court, she noted that the former congressman “was having an affair with Chandra Levy.” She later said those rendezvous had “nothing to do with the murder of Chandra Levy.”
But earlier this year, Guandique’s defense team planned to introduce evidence at a retrial that could implicate Condit.
“Condit was fully aware of the cost he could pay if his affair with Ms. Levy became public,” said the defense in court filings. “He therefore had an obvious motive to kill Ms. Levy in order to keep the relationship secret, and an equally powerful motive to cover up the circumstances of her death if she died while she was with him -- either through intentional conduct or otherwise.”
Back in 2001, all eyes -- including those of media and law enforcement -- focused on Condit.
The case baffled investigators. There was no murder weapon. They found no body (until 2002). No obvious motive. There was cryptic information from Levy’s computer internet searches about the Pierce-Klingle Mansion in the middle of Washington’s Rock Creek Park.
In May, 2002, a man searching for turtles (can this get any weirder?) stumbled upon Levy’s skeletal remains.
Notably on Levy’s computer, there was also a search for Baskin-Robbins. After leaving Congress, Condit operated two Baskin-Robbins franchises near Phoenix.
Baskin-Robbins later sued Condit and his family for failing to pay franchise and advertising fees to the company.
Police eventually ruled Condit out as a suspect. He conceded in an interview he had a tryst with a woman who was nearly three decades his junior. But authorities cleared Condit, despite finding him elusive. Flight attendant Anne Marie Smith also came forward, saying she too had an affair with Condit.
The congressman then refused to submit to a police polygraph.
Is there any reason this story wouldn’t consume media, in Washington or elsewhere?
Condit tried to run for re-election. He lost his primary to a former staffer, Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Calif. Condit’s son Chad ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 2012.
Guandique turned to Levy’s parents when he appeared in court six years ago.
“I’m very sorry for what happened to your daughter,” he said. “But I had nothing to do with it. I am innocent.”
And still, no one knows who did it.
But one thing is clear: the recording Babs Proller made of Armando Morales is the lynchpin to clearing Guandique. That’s the only reason people in Washington are chattering about this case again.
In a final, warped twist, Babs Proller appeared briefly in an episode of “House of Cards.” In a non-speaking role, Proller appears sitting on the dais in the House chamber when President Frank Underwood addresses Congress for his State of the Union message. Proller’s position in the chamber is usually reserved for the clerk of the House during such elite meetings.
The entire Chandra Levy case revolves around quintessential Washington intrigue, even 15 years down the road. A congressman’s liaisons with an intern. Power. An unsolved murder. A media circus. All inside the Beltway touchstones worthy of the program, “House of Cards.”
It appears the government formed its case against Guandique on a house of cards. And perhaps it’s only appropriate that an actress who appeared on “House of Cards” helped immolate the prosecution and the conviction of Guandique.
Who killed Chandra Levy?
Well, it’s like something right out of “House of Cards.”

McConnell, Ryan weigh in on Trump-Khan controversy

The leaders of the Republican-controlled House and Senate on Sunday made statements regarding the firestorm of words between party presidential nominee Donald Trump and Khirz Khan, the Muslim father of an Army captain killed in the line of duty.
Khan, during a speech at last week’s Democratic National Convention, said Trump has "sacrificed nothing and no one" for America.
Trump responded by essentially saying he’s made many sacrifices but drew criticism by questioning why Khan’s wife, Ghazala, stood silently on stage during her husband’s speech.
“She had nothing to say,” Trump said on ABC. “Maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say. You tell me."
Khan had said she didn't speak because she is still overwhelmed by grief and still cannot look at photos of her son without crying.
Since the controversy started late last week, Khirz Khan has called on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan to condemn Trump’s remarks.

2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →

In their statements, McConnell and Ryan each praised Khan’s son, Humayun, who was killed in Iraq in 2004, and said they disagreed with Trump’s immigration position.
Trump said this spring, in the aftermath of several terror attacks by radicalized Islamists, that Muslims should be temporarily banned from entering the United States. He has since scaled backed that position, to keeping out people from Syria and other countries that are hotbeds for radical Islamic terrorism.
However, neither McConnell or Ryan directly criticized Trump or his comments about Ghazala Kahn.
 “Captain Khan was an American hero, and like all Americans I’m grateful for the sacrifices that selfless young men like Capt. Khan and their families have made in the war on terror,” said McConnell, of Kentucky. “And as I have long made clear, I agree with the Kahns and families across the country that a travel ban on all members of a religion is simply contrary to American values.”
Ryan, of Wisconsin, wrote: “As I have said on numerous occasions, a religious test for entering our country is not reflective of these fundamental values. I reject it. … Many Muslim Americans have served valiantly in our military, and made the ultimate sacrifice. Captain Khan was one such brave example.”
Washington Democrats almost immediatley criticized Ryan for also not pulling his endorsement of Trump.
Kahn said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he “appreciates” Trump calling his son a “hero,” but said the praise “sounds disingenuous.”
Trump on Sunday wrote two Twitter posts on the issue:
 “I was viciously attacked by Mr. Khan at the Democratic Convention. Am I not allowed to respond? Hillary voted for the Iraq war, not me!”
He then tweeted: “Captain Khan, killed 12 years ago, was a hero, but this is about RADICAL ISLAMIC TERROR and the weakness of our "leaders" to eradicate it!”
On Sunday, Ghazala Khan further defended her actions on stage and attacked Trump.
“Donald Trump said that maybe I wasn’t allowed to say anything,” she wrote in The Washington Post opinion section. “That is not true. My husband asked me if I wanted to speak, but I told him I could not. … When Donald Trump is talking about Islam, he is ignorant. …  Donald Trump said he has made a lot of sacrifices. He doesn’t know what the word sacrifice means.”
Trump’s original response sparked immediate outrage on social media -- both because they critiqued a mourning mother and because many considered them racist and anti-Muslim.
On Saturday, Ryan spokeswoman AshLee Strong said: "The speaker has made clear many times that he rejects this idea, and himself has talked about how Muslim-Americans have made the ultimate sacrifice for this country."
Hillary Clinton campaign spokeswoman Karen Finney tweeted: “Trump is truly shameless to attack the family of an American hero. Many thanks to the Khan family for your sacrifice, we stand with you.”
Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, later said in a statement: "I was very moved to see Ghazala Khan stand bravely and with dignity in support of her son on Thursday night. ... This is a time for all Americans to stand with the Khans and with all the families whose children have died in service to our country."
Karen Meredith, a member of Gold Star Families, a support group for families who lost loved ones in the Iraq War, said Capt. Humayun Khan’s parents “showed great courage” by standing up in front of the Democratic convention and that for Trump “to insult their culture by saying that is why she did not speak is offensive.”
On Sunday, Khizr Khan also attempted to persuade voters not to vote for Trump, saying, “I appeal to them not to vote for hate-mongering. Vote for freedom.”
He also implied that about of a third of the responses he’s gotten from Americans are from Republican politicians but said he would not disclose names.

Clinton acknowledges hard work ahead, frustrated by America’s ‘caricature’ of her

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton acknowledges that Americans have a legitimate concern about her trustworthiness, particularly related to her email scandal and the Benghazi terror attacks, but criticized those who have attempted to undermine her Democratic presidential campaign and make a “caricature” out of her, in an exclusive interview with “Fox News Sunday.”
“I think that it's fair for Americans to have questions,” Clinton said, in an interview taped Saturday. “Every time I run for an office, though, oh my goodness, all of these caricatures come out of nowhere. And people begin to undermine me because when I left office as secretary of state, 66 percent of Americans approved of what I do.”
According to a Gallup poll cited by Poltifact, Hillary Clinton had a favorability rating of 64 percent when she left her role as secretary state in February 2013. Her rating declined following criticism over the deadly attack of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and her handling of emails while at the State Department.
On the issue of two-thirds of Americans having concerns about her trustworthiness, Clinton repeated what she has often said, “I know that I have work to do.”
In the wide-ranging interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, Clinton said that evidence shows that the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin hacked into Democratic National Committee emails and appeared to time their damaging release to her party’s nomination convention last week.
She stopped short of saying that Putin wants Republican nominee Donald Trump, who has “praised” Putin, to win the White House.

However, Clinton, in her first interview since she accepted the presidential nomination Thursday, said the Putin government appears to have made a “deliberate effort to try to affect the election,” which “raises national security issues.”

On the issue of the Benghazi terror strikes, Clinton denied telling family members of people killed in the Sept. 11, 2012, incident on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, that the attack was sparked by an anti-Islam video and was not terrorism.
She instead suggested the family members misunderstood her because they were overwhelmed by grief.
“I understand the grief and the incredible sense of loss that can motivate that,” Clinton said. “As other members of families who’ve lost loved ones have said, that's not what they heard. I don't hold any ill feeling for someone who, in that moment, may not fully recall everything that was or wasn't said.”
Clinton again said she “made a mistake” by using a private server system to send and receive official emails when she was secretary of state. But she held firm that she did not communicate classified information and appeared to shift the blame onto the roughly 300 people with whom she communicated via email.
“I relied on and had every reason to rely on the judgments of the professionals with whom I worked,” Clinton said. “So in retrospect, maybe some people are saying, ‘Well, those -- among those 300 people -- they made the wrong call.’ At the time, there was no reason, in my view, to doubt the professionalism and the determination by the people who work every single day on behalf of our country.”
She also disagreed with the assertion that FBI Director James Comey, at the conclusion earlier this summer of the agency’s investigation into the matter, said she misled the public when she said she never transmitted classified information.
“That's not what I heard Director Comey say,” Clinton said. “Comey said that my answers were truthful and what I've said is consistent with what I have told the American people.”
In an appearance earlier this month before the House Oversight and Government Reform panel, FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers, “there was classified material emailed,” in response to questions about Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., asked the FBI director: “Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her e-mails, either sent or received. Was that true?”
“That’s not true,” Comey replied.
In a press briefing prior to his House testimony, Comey said, “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
In the "Fox News Sunday" interview, Clinton, who is in a close race with Trump for the White House, also said that she would not attempt to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling on Second Amendment rights, instead urging Congress to enact tighter gun-control measures.

Team Trump: Debate schedule instant replay of Dems' blindside on Sanders

The Commission on Presidential Debates on Sunday issued another statement in an apparent effort to end criticism by Donald Trump’s campaign about two of the events being scheduled during televised NFL games -- and suggested Trump is fighting a losing battle.
“It is impossible to avoid all sporting events, and there have been nights on which debates and games occurred in most election cycles,” the commission wrote. “A debate has never been rescheduled as a result.”
Two of the three debates scheduled in September and October will be televised during NFL games.
On Sept. 26, the night of the first debate, ESPN will carry the Monday night game featuring the Falcons vs. the Saints. On Oct. 9, the second debate will air opposite the Sunday night game featuring the Giants vs. the Packers on NBC.
The commission said officials started working on the debate scheduled more than 18 months ago to identify potential scheduling conflicts with religious and federal holidays, baseball league playoff games, NFL games and other events.
“As a point of reference, in a four-year period, there are four general election debates … and approximately 1,000 NFL games."

2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →

The commission said the final debate dates are picked a year in advance so TV networks have “maximum lead time and predictability in scheduling these extremely important civic education forums."
“The CPD believes the dates for the 2016 debates will serve the American public well,” the commission also said.
Trump said Saturday that the football league complained in a letter to him about the debate schedule.
NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy acknowledged Saturday that the league would like at least one of the debates rescheduled but tweeted: "We did not send a letter to Mr Trump."
The issue follows criticism that the Democratic National Committee intentionally scheduled primary debates on a Saturday night to minimize audiences as a way of protecting frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
And recently leaked emails show that the DNC indeed intended to undermine the campaign of Clinton primary rival Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
“You know, Hillary Clinton wants to be against the NFL,” Trump told ABC’s “This Week," "maybe like she did with Bernie Sanders, where they were on Saturday nights when nobody's home."
Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort seemed to suggested on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the dates are still being negotiated.
“We're going to sit down with the commissioner and talk with them,” he said. “The DNC hack showed you that the Clinton campaign was working to schedule debates against Sanders which have the least possible viewing audience. ... So, I'm not sure what the dates are going to be, ultimately. … But we're not going to fall ploy to the Democrat -- to the Hillary Clinton ploy that she did against Bernie Sanders.”
The Clinton campaign has not comment on Trump's assertion.
Trump did allow that three debates were "fine" and that he'd rather have three than one.