Comments on: Jane Harman Caught On NSA Wiretap Lobbying For AIPAC?

By: justadood

justadood — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:19:57 +0000

There’s more on Harman on Firedoglake… Granted, I’m no Harman fan, and want to see her primaried out on ’10 for a Dem who pays attention to the district’s constituents, as opposed to the corporations operating therein…but the more info that comes up on this, the more it sounds like there’s a significant element of ‘set-up’ in this.

I’m keeping tuned into this, as much for what bubbles up about Harman as for info that can be recycled to take before a Grand Jury investigating Bush cronies/crimes…remember *when* this went down, and starting looking at the ‘forest’ around this ‘tree’…

By: sgwhiteinfla

sgwhiteinfla — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:53:25 +0000

By: sgwhiteinfla

sgwhiteinfla — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:31:55 +0000

Josh Marshall kind of game plans some of the story out.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/04/another_key_question.php

And here’s where it gets sticky. The whole legal question would then depend largely, perhaps entirely, on whether that suspicion was legally provable.

To see what I mean, let’s come at this from another hypothetical read of the facts. What if US citizen A comes to Harman and says, this AIPAC spy case is a total set up, an end-run around the first amendment (the argument the defenders have subsequently made, with some legal success). US citizen A asks Harman to weigh in with Gonzales (who she has lots of pull with) in exchange for help lobbying Pelosi to make her head of the intelligence committee.

To be clear, I’m not speaking to the wisdom, ethics or morality of such a deal. But if the person on the other end of the call is a US Citizen and the government can’t sustain the charge that they were acting as the agent of a foreign power, it’s really hard for me to see what criminal statutes that agreement would violate.

To push it further, what if it was one of her constituents? Now I realize the part about lobbying for her to chair the intelligence committee is a pay to play scheme but if it was one of her constituents asking her to step in on their behalf then would it really rise to the level of what the story make it out to be and would that have been enough to get Harman to be the Bush administration’s lackey? Again I don’t know, maybe the story has it exactly right but it just seems like there are a lot of holes in the story and because there are former Bush officials throwing her under the bus could this be a means to put her in position to lose next year and get a republican in that seat? It seems that it could at least be a possibility. I think its time for some major FOI requests.

By: riffle

riffle — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 05:37:02 +0000

agreeing with bruddaone — “lobbying” seems pretty inartful here. She wasn’t acting as a registered lobbyist (which is what most people think of when they hear “lobbbying” in conjunction with “Washington.”)

Depending on the circumstances, I’d “interfering with an ongoing investigation” seems most apt.

But sgwhiteinfla wrote “They used illegal wiretapping to get the information. ” On the contrary the story says “What is new is that Harman is said to have been picked up on a court-approved NSA tap ….”. From that I’d think it’s probable (though of course not certain) that the wiretap that got Harmon was legal.

At any rate, interfering with an espionage investigation on behalf of a foreign country is pretty scummy behavior.

By: sgwhiteinfla

sgwhiteinfla — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 05:12:34 +0000

Honestly something about that story smells to high heavens. They used illegal wiretapping to get the information. Therefore there is no way in the hell they would have been able to use it against her. In effect if they revealed how they got the information she would have had the Bush administration by the balls. Besides that nobody would go on the record for the story. But the people giving up the info were FORMER intelligence officials so why would they need anonymity? Hey I don’t know much about the lady and maybe she was the worlds biggest double agent. But I don’t know that I am buying the story as the stenographer put it out there. It just seems counterfactual to me. She wasn’t offered money and according the story she wasn’t even guaranteed the chair, just that they would lobby Pelosi for her. Fishy

By: bruddaone

bruddaone — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 03:56:46 +0000

Is lobbying the new word for treason now…?

By: jr

jr — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 03:11:34 +0000

Primary time

By: Repack Rider

Repack Rider — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 03:00:45 +0000

She had her chance to address the illegal intercepts, and she whiffed. Now, apparently and allegedly and with all the usual caveats, she is hoist on the same petard.

Karma is a bitch, but she had it coming. Harman has been an embarrassment to the Democratic Party for years and this might just get her out of there.

I think Jane got some ‘splainin’ to do.