Reply With Quote
Sounds like lots of fish might get caught in that net....both sides can blush.
Major scandal erupts involving Rep. Jane Harman, Alberto Gonzales and AIPAC
MONDAY APRIL 20, 2009 07:35 EDT
Glenn Greenwald
I wanted to highlight this extremely important and well-reported story from CQ's Jeff Stein, which involves allegations of major corruption and serious criminal activity on the part of Democratic Rep. Jane Harman. Here's one crucial prong of the story:
Rep. Jane Harman , the California Democrat with a longtime involvement in intelligence issues, was overheard on an NSA wiretap telling a suspected Israeli agent that she would lobby the Justice Department to reduce espionage-related charges against two officials of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful pro-Israel organization in Washington.
Harman was recorded saying she would “waddle into” the AIPAC case “if you think it’ll make a difference,” according to two former senior national security officials familiar with the NSA transcript.
In exchange for Harman’s help, the sources said, the suspected Israeli agent pledged to help lobby Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., then-House minority leader, to appoint Harman chair of the Intelligence Committee after the 2006 elections, which the Democrats were heavily favored to win.
Seemingly wary of what she had just agreed to, according to an official who read the NSA transcript, Harman hung up after saying, “This conversation doesn’t exist.”
That's not even the most significant part. Back in October, 2006, Time reported that the DOJ and FBI were investigating whether Harman and AIPAC "violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee" and "the probe also involves whether, in exchange for the help from AIPAC, Harman agreed to help try to persuade the Administration to go lighter on the AIPAC officials caught up in the ongoing investigation." So that part has been known since 2006.
Stein adds today that Harman was captured on an NSA wiretap conspiring with an Israeli agent to apply pressure on DOJ officials to scale back the AIPAC prosecution. But the real crux of Stein's scoop is that then-Attorney General Alberto Gonazles intervened to kill the criminal investigation into Harman -- even though DOJ lawyers had concluded that she committed crimes -- because top Bush officials wanted Harman's credibility to be preserved so that she could publicly defend the Bush administration's illegal warrantless eavesdropping program:
[C]ontrary to reports that the Harman investigation was dropped for “lack of evidence,” it was Alberto R. Gonzales, President Bush’s top counsel and then attorney general, who intervened to stop the Harman probe.
Why? Because, according to three top former national security officials, Gonzales wanted Harman to be able to help defend the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, which was about to break in The New York Times and engulf the White House. . . .
Justice Department attorneys in the intelligence and public corruption units who read the transcripts decided that Harman had committed a “completed crime,” a legal term meaning that there was evidence that she had attempted to complete it, three former officials said. . . .
Then-CIA Director Porter J. Goss reviewed the Harman transcript and signed off on the Justice Department’s FISA application. . . . Goss, a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, deemed the matter particularly urgent because of Harman’s rank as the panel’s top Democrat.
But that’s when, according to knowledgeable officials, Attorney General Gonzales intervened.
According to two officials privy to the events, Gonzales said he “needed Jane” to help support the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, which was about to be exposed by the New York Times.
Harman, he told Goss, had helped persuade the newspaper to hold the wiretap story before, on the eve of the 2004 elections. And although it was too late to stop the Times from publishing now, she could be counted on again to help defend the program
He was right.
On Dec. 21, 2005, in the midst of a firestorm of criticism about the wiretaps, Harman issued a statement defending the operation and slamming the Times, saying, “I believe it essential to U.S. national security, and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities.”
And thanks to grateful Bush administration officials, the investigation of Harman was effectively dead.
Indeed, as I've noted many times, Jane Harman, in the wake of the NSA scandal, became probably the most crucial defender of the Bush warrantless eavesdropping program, using her status as "the ranking Democratic on the House intelligence committee" to repeatedly praise the NSA program as "essential to U.S. national security" and "both necessary and legal." She even went on Meet the Press to defend the program along with GOP Sen. Pat Roberts and Rep. Pete Hoekstra, and she even strongly suggested that the whistleblowers who exposed the lawbreaking and perhaps even the New York Times (but not Bush officials) should be criminally investigated, saying she "deplored the leak," that "it is tragic that a lot of our capability is now across the pages of the newspapers," and that the whistleblowers were "de able." And Eric Lichtblau himself described how Harman, in 2004, attempted very aggressively to convince him not to write about the NSA program.
Stein's entire story should be read. It's a model of excellent reporting, as it relies on numerous sources with first-hand knowledge of the NSA transcripts (and what sweet justice it would be if Harman's guilt were established by government eavesdropping). It should be noted that Harman has issued a general denial of wrongdoing (but does not appear to deny that she had the discussion Stein reports), and the sources in Stein's story are anonymous (though because they're disclosing classified information and exposing government wrongdoing, it's a classic case of when anonymity is justifiable; and note Stein's efforts to provide as much information as possible about his sources and why they are anonymous).
There are many questions that the story raises -- Josh Marshall notes just some of those vital questions here -- and Harman's guilt therefore shouldn't be assumed. But obviously, given all the very serious issues this story raises -- involving what seem to be credible allegations of very serious wrongdoing by a key member of Congress, the former Attorney General and one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in the country -- full-scale investigations are needed, to put it mildly.
LINK
Sounds like lots of fish might get caught in that net....both sides can blush.
I'm all for reopening that investigation. A lot of questions there.
Even if greymail thwarts discovery in the prosecution of Rosen and Weissman, the FBI investigation may proceed on a different track, presenting similar challenges to the US/Israel special relationship.
One thing DC and all politicians hate is transparency.
After 8 years of abuses, lies, and crimes, lack any accountability, dubya, head and their fellow-travellers have produced "outrage fatigue".
Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_ Spitzer may have been one of the last effective crusaders willing to take on such cases. The Repugs and Wall Street taking Spitzer down preempts any other crusaders stepping up. All the balless assholes will keep their heads down, knowing their careers will be destroyed if they try to take on the establishment.
eg, nobody has really taken on the banker and financial sector for screwing the world's economy.
Let Freedom and Democracy Reign.
Could be. Sure looks like it.
Probably a safe bet, but democracy is messy. One way for intelligence bureaus to recoup credibility is to reveal official corruption, but this can be dangerous for both the investigator and the public mood.Spitzer may have been one of the last effective crusaders willing to take on such cases. The Repugs and Wall Street taking Spitzer down preempts any other crusaders stepping up. All the balless assholes will keep their heads down, knowing their careers will be destroyed if they try to take on the establishment.
Yeah, I'm still waiting for our government to start to manage what it already owns, but I'm not holding my breath.eg, nobody has really taken on the banker and financial sector for screwing the world's economy.
The socialists and fascists in power are appparently cowed by the banks, and refuse to take them over. Maybe they're waiting for the first big domino to fall over all on its own, without any help. Maybe they lack the technical capacity to take over the likes of AIG or Citi. Maybe the day of default really can be postponed by contining to dance around it.
After all, you're not really bankrupt unless your creditors know it too.
Problem is, the lack of financial transparency necessary to maintain the illusion that our banking sector is healthy, undermines trust in the market and makes risk unpriceable.
True. It's not as though the federal gov't was not culpable in this instance.
Could be. Still, Goldman's ass gets in a jam and suddenly Congress faces a request for a $700 billion blank check to be filled out by its former Chairman and CEO.The socialists and fascists in power are appparently cowed by the banks, and refuse to take them over. Maybe they're waiting for the first big domino to fall over all on its own, without any help.
Most likely, both. Is Geithner's staff at least official now?Maybe they lack the technical capacity to take over the likes of AIG or Citi. Maybe the day of default really can be postponed by contining to dance around it.
After all, you're not really bankrupt unless your creditors know it too.
I don't know, but I would guess not. Candidates keep withdrawing, and advice and consent is far from being a rubber stamp.
It used to be fashionable to say that the President is *en led to have his nominees*. Unfortunately, Obama's pattern of failure to present adequately vetted candidates has aroused the Senate's vigilance. It will be slow going.
"The socialists and fascists in power are appparently cowed by the banks"
no, they are OWNED/CAPTURED by banks and financial sector, the single sector that contributed the most Congressmen since the mid-90s. Is how they "bought" the destruction of Glass-Steagal, and made illegal any regulation of derivatives and CDS.
One can imagine that it might be somewhat difficult attracting the best talent for those spots given the personal scrutiny from the Congress and the press, not to mention the relatively low remuneration.
Then again, has this country benefited from the revolving door between Wall Street and DC?
There's very little doubt the interests of finance and banking have been overrepresented in policy, and that this influence has been at its greatest in the last 25 years or so. You seem to construe this as proof of an already existing oligarchy.
I disagree. I see the bailout of the shadow banking system as being the crucial transfer of wealth and power to financial ins utions, as well as being our definitive transition to oligarchy, directly and without further mediation.
The US is taking liens out on our collective future prosperity and giving it to the banks.
Let's send them all to jail!
We all know warrantless wiretaps were never abused...
You can see why Dems were quick to sign off on the immunity for telecoms. You have to wonder what else you could find by digging on that .
If discovery happens, the al Haramain lawyers may gain standing for their suit. There are odd little threads poking out here and there in the ongoing legal striptease.
Once you start pulling the threads though, you run the risk of seeing the truth bare: an unfortunate occurrance all decent people meekly seek to avoid.
Winehole
The current robbery of US Treasury by Tim Goldman Geithner, and Hank Goldman Paulsen earlier, to save the bankers, maybe some banks (but no bank nationalization which nearly all economists agree is the real solution, aka like RTC and Sweden), without saving the taxpayers' real economy as distant 3rd, are ABSOLUTE PROOF that the kleptocratic oligarchy is in full operation, and has been going back to robber barons, and was ins utionalized as the secretive capitalists' club (we don't know who the members are) aka The Federal Reserve.
Goldman Paulsen paid off/bailed out AIG, who then paid off $13B to Paulsen's Goldman, the single biggest payout by AIG. The main reason Paulsen saved AIG while letting Goldman compe or Lehman die.
etc, etc, etc.
btw, had McLiar and pitbull won, TARP, etc, would be EXACTLY the same as under The Magik Negro.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 04-20-2009 at 04:37 PM.
Offensive and succinct, like your namesake. Bravo!
I guess where you and I differ is that you think a clubby cabal was already running the show; I think one soon will be.
She is going down.
Did everyone miss the obvious?
We have a leak of what was said by someone committing an illegal act. Telling us secret information. On top of that, phrases with no full quotes in context.
Now this may or may not be as the article frames it. However, if she was already under investigation, it is less likely the terrorist surveillance part of tha patriot act that caught the conversation, but measures already in place.
I see this as an attempt to undermine legal activity. You should all keep an open mind to all possibilities, includiong a fabricated story.
Can we all say UNNAMED SOURCES...
Not enough.
I don't think anyone has really jumped to conclusions here (seriously anyway). There seems to be enough smoke to justify investigating whether there is/was a fire.
If that's true, then we can assume there really is a security leak, and that mofo needs to be jailed as well.
I think you missed the point entirely. Youre choosing to protect criminals only because they hold office. the sources. Look at what and who it implicates.
Then try and tie the loose ends together and kick some tires. Joe Public has always assumed power was buyable, that political office had little to do with a en or idealism and our leaders are robbing us blind in someone else's interest.
Leaks like this only confirm it. Some of our most important foreign policies are crafted on the back of the Intelligence Committee....and to think its power and influence was a commodity that could be traded by a foreign lobbyist group is sickening even for a jaded prick like myself.
Eh, there are all kinds of reasons for leaks. The legal case may have been stalled or maybe even on the way to being quashed. Leaking some details ensures it won't easily go away.
Who it implicates depends on the spin of the known shaky facts. It is not my intent at all to protect criminals. If what is reported is true, throw the in jail. Remember, to tap her phone, we already had cause to investigate her.
This is true, and one reason why I support an element from the Articles of Confederation. It states:
It isn't term limits, but in this case prevents consecutive terms. That would help putting a stop on people gaining personal power in politics.no person shall be capable of being a delegate for more than three years in any term of six years; nor shall any person, being a delegate, be capable of holding any office under the United States, for which he, or another for his benefit, receives any salary, fees or emolument of any kind.
I agree, but you still don't report leaks, without really knowing the facts for certain. Now I would say this is unlikely, but what if she was working on the inside to find others. We now have a blown investigation.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
