by Sharon Rondeau

(Apr. 13, 2016) — The civil attorney for late “DC Madam” Deborah Jeane Palfrey, Montgomery Blair Sibley, reported on Wednesday evening that U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas has recommended that his application to lift a 2007 stay on the release of phone and names records associated with Palfrey’s escort business has been distributed for conference among the high court’s members for April 29.

On his blog on Wednesday, Sibley wrote:

Today, Justice Thomas — apparently disagreeing with Chief Justice Roberts’ denial of my Application — has referred myApplication for determination by the entire Supreme Court at their Conference on April 29th.
More waiting for Lady Justice to grind out her answer.  But at least all of the Justices will be on record as to whether they will continue the muzzling of my First Amendment Political Speech so that We the People can govern ourselves accordingly.

Last week, Sibley petitioned Chief Justice John Roberts to consider lifting the restraining order but was denied.

In accordance with Supreme Court Rule 22.4, following Roberts’s denial, Sibley resubmitted his application on April 6 to Thomas, predicting a response within a week.

When Sibley began his efforts to have the restraining order lifted in January, he gave his reason that the records contain data relevant to the 2016 presidential election.

Last month, the National ENQUIRER reported both online and in print that presidential candidate Ted Cruz has had affairs with five women.  A subsequent NE issue reported that Cruz’s wife, Heidi, “confronted” him about the allegations.  On Fox News’s “The Kelly File” on Tuesday evening, Mrs. Cruz denied the ENQUIRER’s reports, calling them “garbage” perpetrated by fellow Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Trump has denied being the source of the story.

On Monday, Sibley discovered that a lawsuit he filed against now-retired D.C. Superior Court Judge Richard Roberts, who imposed the stay in May 2007, was “removed” to the U.S. District Court for the District of Washington, DC.  Therefore, Sibley reported that he “jumped through that opening and filed with U.S. District Court Judge Walton both my First Amended Complaint and ‘Emergency Motion for Pre-trial Conference to Schedule Expedited Disposition of Sibley’s Third Claim.'”

At the same time, Sibley identified in “Exhibit B” of the Emergency Motion 174 companies whose phone numbers reportedly appear in the unreleased list of alleged clients subpoenaed and responded to by Verizon Wireless years ago.  He released no individuals’ names, however.

On April 6, The Post & Email noted that the ENQUIRER appeared to display a future issue in which Ted Cruz’s name is said to be on the unreleased DC Madam names and phone numbers list.  In an online article dated April 12, the ENQUIRER reported, “Political insiders are scrambling in the wake of The National ENQUIRER’s bombshell scoop on the Ted Cruz sex scandal — and now a notorious Washington, D.C., madame could expose more secrets from beyond the grave!”


Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Mr. Sibley,

    On behalf of 320,000,000 American citizens, it is your duty to release all 800 plus names on the Madame’s list, if you can.


    Because the list may include ID Thief Rafael Cruz, who is a fugitive from the US Constitutional mandate of “natural born Citizen”. Revealing his name of subject list may remove Lyin’ Ted from the RINOCRIMINAL Party’s line-up since Criminal Cruz has no inalienable right to be anything other than a natural born Canadian.

    Maybe Traitor Boehner and Contempt-of-Congress Eric Holder and other high-end low-life criminals will also be on this list!

    You are dealing with a national crime syndication of The Pelosi-Obama Sedition (POS) 08-28-08- TODAY. You will never get law enforcement from today’s guilty-knowledged federal-criminal “outlawyers” and their supportive pimps of Lady Justice, the so-called politically corrupt US Supreme Court.

    The pimps of Lady Justice have zero respect for you, so why should you show deference to them?


  2. Confounds me that any court could presume the authority to prohibit exposing any and all names involved in any criminal act. If the so called dc madame is guilty of a crime then so are all participants, and are deserving of no more protection than the Madame. They are certainly not victims.