Bombshell Story of the Day. The Mobius Strip of Espionage Against Americans
By Brad Porter | Related entries in NewsToday, CQ dropped a bombshell of a story. It’s hard to recap in short form; I suggest you read the article (I try to unpack it in longer form here).
Essentially: Representative Jane Harman was being wiretapped in 2004/2005, as part of the NSA’s warrantless wiretap program (which, at the time, was a secret). On that wiretap, she is caught conferring with a suspected Israeli covert intelligence agent, who asks Harman’s help in trying to have the sentence of two other Israeli spies reduced, in exchange for AIPAC and the Israel lobby working to get Harman promoted to the intelligence committee.
The FBI sought to continue the investigation and possibly bring charges against Harman, but Alberto Gonzales intervened and nipped it all in the bud. The official reason was “lack of evidence”, though based on what CQ is reporting it sounds like there was indeed very direct evidence. But the actual reason was that Jane Harman, it was thought, could be an influential defender of the NSA wiretapping program (the same one that was spying on her and collecting damning information!). Harman had intervened in getting the New York Times to sit on the warrantless wiretapping story until after the 2004 election; Gonzales then decided to scratch her back (and possibly blackmail her) by dropping the investigation. When the warrantless wiretapping story did break (and create a lot of controversy), Gonzales and the Bush administration didn’t have a lot of friends in their corner, but they did have Jane Harman in their pocket as she continued to push back against critics of the program.
The whole thing is incredibly sordid and deeply, deeply alarming, for a myriad of reasons. I really suggest you read the article. I don’t even know that I can offer cogent thoughts until I digest all these astonishingly sordid revelations.
This entry was posted on Monday, April 20th, 2009 and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 20th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Sounds pretty bad…let’s add her to the list (the ever growing list) of those who need to be tossed out on their ears.
With Jefferson gone, that puts Harman on the shortlist behind Murtha, and Mollohan–and I certainly wouldn’t mind a few hearings on Richardson. Landrieu, Lipinski and Rangel.
I won’t go into the Repubs who out to be canned. The Dems should set the bar high for its reps and senators so people will take them seriously.
April 20th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Two corrections:
1. It is not clear from the story whether the wiretap on Harman was with a warrant or not. It was a FISA wiretap, but whether conducted through the old methods or via the Bushian revamped and supercharged process is unclear. That’s probably worth somebody figuring out: the executive surveilling members of the opposition party in Congress is, clearly, something that needs very, very clear line defined.
2. It is also not clear that the person lobbying Harman was a covert agent (CQ’s implication, which they make explicit in their story), or just a lobbyist. Jeffrey Goldberg suggests the latter.
Like I said, this is a story that’s going to take a lot of unpacking.
Harman I think is only the third most important actor here, gerryf. The first two are, in order:
1. An executive branch spying on members of Congress (perhaps illegally, perhaps not) and then apparently deciding how to use (or not use) that information based purely and explicitly on political advantage.
2. And secondly, AIPAC. I know it’s very radioactive to talk about any kind of Zionist conspiracy, but at this point I don’t think you have to be anti-Semitic to recognize that AIPAC is a little more than simply an effective lobbying organization. It appears to be a direct organ of the Israeli state and, particularly, its intelligence services, not only extracting a great deal of overt, political influence, but also as a launchpad for covert espionage. Although they are a friendly country, the extent to which they’re engaging in intelligence operations against us is alarming, and I’m not sure I want Benjamin Netanyahu with a direct line to state secrets and blackmail material on enormously influential members of Congress. It’s getting ridiculous with AIPAC, like the KGB setting up shop on K-Street and being so brazen as to hang a sign over their door.
April 20th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
I agree, but THAT executive branch is no longer in office. Therefore, we need to move Harman up. Furthermore, the removal of Harman sends a clear message to AIPAC as well as any other members of Congress (or lobbying groups) who might wish to engage in these kinds of questionable activities.
If any one wants to get Harman to cop a plea to build evidence against Gonzales et. all, I’m for that….
We need to clear out the corruption wherever we find it.
April 20th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
It occurs to me that the narrative across several blogs is that Harman was the one under the wiretap, but that isn’t actually specifically stated, nor even really implied. It seems like it is also potentially possible the wiretapping was of the AIPAC agents, and Harman happened to walk into them.
It doesn’t do much to diffuse the overall event, but it is an important note to make.
April 20th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
One of the major claims, that she lobbied New York Times was just blown out of the water as Keller denies she even spoke to him. This is looking like a Seymour Hersh special I am afraid.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
As soon as I saw it, I knew this story was bad news, as it proves valid concerns that monitoring in the service of national security might be abused for either criminal prosecutions or for politically embarrassing people.
It would be more credible, however, if the liberals who are screaming now had not been so gleeful when Newt Gingrich’s politically embarrassing cell phone conversations were intercepted in the 1990s. But I guess shameless reversal of standards is becoming the norm for partisans.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
According to the sited article the FISA motivated wiretapping came after the initial capture of the comments by Harmon while interfacing with an Israeli operative who was under secret investigation. It almost sounds like a Ludlum novel doesn’t it? If it’s all true she does in fact need to be prosecuted and turfed out on her ear – or suffer some jail time. Brad, regarding your concern about anti-semitism all I can say is a strong dislike for Israel is not anti-semitic (there’s a lot to dislike actually) and should not be compared with Judaism. One is a government, the other is a religion – they are not the same thing.
This whole situation is quite confusing as Brad states. There are a lot of moving parts here and after 8 years of Bush how many of these parts were actual versus how many were simple misdirection?
1 -Do I believe that AIPAC are without a doubt an arm of the Israeli government – absolutely.
2 – Do I believe that AIPAC exercises nearly criminal conduct with regard to fulfilling their mission here in the US – absolutely.
3 – Do I believe that Israelis are that enmeshed in the US intelligence community – absolutely.
4 – Do I believe the Israeli’s can strong-arm elected representatives in the US Federal government – absolutely.
5 – Do I believe that Gonzales would have actively used this information on Harmon (no matter how it was gained) in order to conduct political blackmail – absolutely.
6 – Do I believe that the Bush administration knew they “f’d” up with the warrantless wiretapping and would go to any lengths to not have it blow up – absolutely.
And having said all that, the whole story seems almost too neat. It sounds like a conspiracy to hurt AIPAC and by association the Israelis. It also sounds like something the Israelis would cook up in order to appear to have been a victim – which fits with their national behavior these past 10 years. It sounds like a conspiracy to destroy the Justice Depart. under Gonzales – as if that needed help. It sounds like a conspiracy to hurt Jane Harmon – and if the facts are to be believed she conspired against herself. Finally, it appears to put front and center the question about just exactly how much information is being recorded all over the US?
Who is being tapped, what information is being obtained and how many other people are being blackmailed in exactly the same way as Harmon is alleged to have been? Is this Bush program completely out of control – is this the tip of the ice berg? Does this mean the Department of Defense and those civilian organizations attached to them (either directly or indirectly such as AIPAC and defense contractors) can wield enormous influence over policy and personnel choices through apparent illegal activity? I wonder if this story has real “leg’s”, or if it will be swept under the rug as so many other stories have been lately.
April 20th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Jason wrote
It would be more credible, however, if the liberals who are screaming now had not been so gleeful when Newt Gingrich’s politically embarrassing cell phone conversations were intercepted in the 1990s. But I guess shameless reversal of standards is becoming the norm for partisans.
I guess the only difference is that they have nothing in common. Gingrich’s call was intercepted by individuals who were caught prosecuted and paid a fine. NO illegal government wiretaps were used on the guy who first who used the oral sex is not sex argument (while you are talking about double standards) Nice try at blurring the real issue though. The government was “potentially” spying illegally on an elected representative. Surely you can see the difference.
April 20th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Weren’t you kind of chastising me in the other thread for making a statement about “conservatives” being hypocrites for bashing Obama for out of control spending while giving Bush a pass? Aren’t you doing the same thing here?
I sure would like you to document all these liberals who are saying this–I took a quick run around the web and found very few “liberals” defending Harman. I’m sure there are some, though.
You need not document it.
You see, I know that you are not saying ALL LIBERALS when you say LIBERALS, and if it weren’t for the other thread, I wouldn’t bring it up, but you hold others to a higher standard that you hold yourself.
My point? We all need to stop looking for phony reasons to get upset. If Justin wants to note Obama is doing something with budget restraint, let’s not go nuts on him or anyone else. Yeah, he used the word celebrate, but he also couched it with enough context that you and anyone else who read it knew he was saying–”Hey, it’s something.”
I don’t know your style well enough to criticize you specifically, but I will say that one of the most maddening things that conservatives do that drives progressives nuts is to glom onto one word and make an argument over it while ignoring the greater context.
That was done with the other post; and I just did it here….makes for a pretty inhospitable place, doesn’t it?