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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

It doesn’t do much to diffuse the overall event, but it is an important note to make.

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.

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.

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.