Harman's Wiretap Woes and the AIPAC Cabal
by Marcy Winograd

How ironic that I made my decision to challenge 
Jane Harman in 2006 after watching her Meet the 
Press interview in which she lambasted the New 
York Times for breaking the story about the Bush 
administration's massive illegal wiretapping. 
"Oh my God," I told my husband, who was doing 
Sunday sit-ups in front of the television set, 
"this woman needs to be challenged -- on the 
wiretaps, on the war, and on her collusion with 
the Bush mob." 

By the time I poured my coffee and grabbed my 
cell phone, I was off and running, campaigning as 
an insurgent Democratic Party peace candidate in 
the 36th congressional district.

Now we see another page in the script, if we 
believe reporter Jeff Stein that Harman's 
sycophantic defense of the FISA violations was 
part of the deal: She, in return for 
then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' help in 
halting an FBI investigation, would do her best 
to defend and deflect attention from the illegal 
wiretaps.  The fact that Harman, herself, was 
wiretapped, perhaps with good reason, is simply 
serendipitous poetry.

And now it gets interesting.  Will the Democratic 
Party establishment ignore this latest 
development in a longstanding corruption scandal? 
With Harman's next primary more than a year away, 
ignoring her quid-pro-quo may seem to be a viable 
strategy.  But if ignoring it doesn't work, then 
the party establishment may need to distract 
people with something even more insidious than a 
Democratic Party congresswoman in bed with agents 
of a foreign power.  Diverting attention 
elsewhere could make establishment Democrats do 
something they have been reluctant to do -- 
prosecute the Bush administration torturers, 
shine the spotlight on those who gave the orders 
and provided legal cover to waterboard and more. 
This is the kind of cover a progressive Democrat 
could relish. 

Since the Harman-AIPAC story broke - again -- 
friends and bloggers, including members of the 
Progressive Democrats of America have emailed me, 
asking, "Will you run again in 2010?"  My 
response has been, "Or sooner?"  (Politicians, 
even grassroots activists like myself, know how 
to answer a tough question with a question.) 
Whether Harman and the Democratic establishment 
can stand this heat, this pall, remains to be
seen, though I wouldn't be surprised if a special 
election snuck up on us before 2010.

The best part about this story is not what we 
know, but what we don't know, the questions that 
beg to be answered.

Who was going to lobby House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 
to make Harman the Chair of the Intelligence 
Committee?   Maybe a moneyed bundler or perhaps 
even a congressperson connected to AIPAC, a 
true-believer in Israel, someone who would never 
raise a question about illegal Israeli 
settlements, home demolitions, 1948 massacres of 
Palestinian villages, or Israeli occupations of 
Lebanon.

Right after the 2006 primary, Israel invaded 
Lebanon.  As the Israeli bombs turned Lebanese 
neighborhoods into blood-filled craters,  Harman 
went on television to justify the invasion. 
Never mind the carpet bombing.

Days later, after I, together with LA Jews for 
Peace, organized demonstrations in front of the 
Israeli consulate, Harman invited me and a dozen 
others who worked on my campaign to meet with her 
in her office.  I begged her, literally begged 
her, to call for a cease-fire in the middle east. 
She wouldn't hear of it and drew back when I 
suggested she at least talk to members of 
Americans for Peace Now, an American offshoot of 
an Israeli peace group.

Was Harman a true believer in Israel and AIPAC or 
was she caught up in a script that had spun out 
of control?

Hard to say -- given the fact that so many of our 
Los Angeles-area law makers, from Howard Berman, 
Chair of the powerful House Foreign Affairs 
Committee, to Henry Waxman, Chair of the House 
Energy Committee, have yet to raise a critical 
question about Israel's use of white phosphorous 
and DIME explosives weapons in the open-air 
prison of Gaza.

As much as this story is about Harman, about her 
collusion with a Bush administration bent on 
breaking the law, it is also about the pernicious 
influence wielded in Washington by lobbyists for 
a foreign government.  Israel.

Let us remind Harman and the rest of Congress 
that they represent the people of the United 
States of America. 

Marcy Winograd,
Co-founder
Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles
LA Chapter of Progressive Democrats of America

                                                                                
     4/21/09

##    ##
The Harman-AIPAC Story: A Timeline (tpm)
By 
<http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/zroth>Zachary 
Roth - April 20, 2009, 5:29PM
CQ's 
<http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page3.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436&cpage=1>blockbuster
 
story, about a wiretap that picked up Rep. Jane 
Harman (D-CA) discussing the AIPAC spying case 
with a "suspected Israeli agent", picks up on a 
sequence of complex events from several years 
ago, and involves several moving pieces.
So we thought it would be worthwhile to put 
together a timeline of events laying out the 
major reported developments in this sprawling 
story.
Without further ado:
* November 2004: The New York Times, after 
intense lobbying from the Bush administration, 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/13/opinion/13pubed.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp>decides
 
to hold a planned report on the NSA's warrantless 
wiretapping program.
* A few months later: Harman, the ranking 
Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/key_dem_urged_nyt_reporter_aga.php>tells
 
Eric Lichtblau, one of the Times reporters on the 
as-yet-unpublished wiretap story: "The Times did 
the right thing by not publishing that story ... 
This is a valuable program, and it would be 
compromised."
* May 2005 - Larry Franklin, a former employee of 
the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, is 
<http://physics911.net/franklinindictment>indicted 
for passing to lobbyists for AIPAC information 
about US policy on Iran.
* Around mid-2005: The Justice Department 
<http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1549069,00.html>expands 
its investigation into the AIPAC spying case to 
include whether Harman schemed with AIPAC to have 
wealthy supporters lobby House Democratic leader 
Nancy Pelosi to reappoint Harman as the top 
Democrat on the House intel committee. In return, 
it was alleged that Harman said she'll press DOJ 
to go easy on Steve Rosen and Ken Weissman, two 
former AIPAC staffers implicated in the Franklin 
indictment.
* Aug 2005: Rosen and Weissman are 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Franklin_Rosen_Weissman_indictment.pdf>indicted
 
(pdf) for their role in the AIPAC espionage.
* Oct 2005 - Franklin 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/05/AR2005100501608_pf.html>pleads
 
guilty to unauthorized disclosure of classified 
information, and is later sentenced to almost 13 
years in prison.
* Around Oct 2005: An NSA wiretap 
<http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page3.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436&cpage=1>picks
 
up a phone call between Harman and a "suspected 
Israeli agent," discussing the quid pro quo 
involving Rosen, Weissman, and the intel chair 
job. (A different report 
<http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/04/who_listened_to_harman_nsa_or_fbi.php>suggests
 
that the wiretap was carried out not by the NSA, 
but by the FBI, as part of the Rosen-Weissman 
probe.)
* Soon afterwards: Justice Department lawyers 
<http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page3.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436&cpage=1>read
 
the transcripts of the call, and decide that 
Harman has committed a "completed crime," meaning 
they thought evidence existed that Harman had 
tried to put the scheme into motion. The 
government lawyers are prepared to open a case on 
Harman, involving FISA-approved wiretaps.
* Soon after that: Then-CIA Director Porter Goss 
<http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page3.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436&cpage=1>reviews
 
the transcript of the call and signs off on the 
Justice Department's FISA application. Goss also 
decides he's required to notify then-House 
Speaker Dennis Hastert and Pelosi, of the 
impending probe, since it involves a sitting 
House member.
* Soon after that: Then-Attorney General Alberto 
Gonzales 
<http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page3.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436&cpage=1>short-circuits
 
the investigation, saying he "needed Jane" to 
publicly support the administration's warrantless 
wiretapping program, which was now, finally, 
about to be exposed by the Times. Gonzales told 
Goss that Harman had helped persuade the Times to 
hold the earlier story on the program (a claim 
Times executive editor Bill Keller today 
<http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/new-york-times-denies-harman-helped-persuade-bill-keller-to-hold-wiretapping-story/>appeared
 
to deny, though his statement was narrowly 
worded), and could serve as an important public 
defender of the program.
* Dec 16, 2005: The Times 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html>breaks 
the warrantless wiretapping story.
* Dec 21, 2005: Proving Gonzales right, Harman 
<http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page3.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436&cpage=1>issues
 
a statement on the wiretapping program: "I 
believe it essential to U.S. national security, 
and that its disclosure has damaged critical 
intelligence capabilities."
* Several months before Oct 2006: Haim Saban, an 
AIPAC supporter and major Democratic fundraiser, 
<http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1549069,00.html>calls 
Pelosi, lobbying her to reappoint Harman as the 
top Dem on the intel committee. (By this time, 
the Democrats appear likely to retake the House, 
meaning the job at issue is chair of the intel 
committee.)
* Oct 20, 2006: Harman 
<http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1549069,00.html>hires 
top Washington lawyer Ted Olson, in response to a 
report by Time magazine about the Justice 
Department probe of the alleged Harman-AIPAC quid 
pro quo, and about the Saban-Pelosi call.
* The following week: Several major news outlets 
report that, according to DOJ sources, the Harman 
probe is dormant and didn't turn up evidence of 
wrongdoing.
* Dec 2006: Pelosi 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/02/AR2006120200339.html>announces
 
that Rep. Silvestre Reyes will chair the House 
Intel committee, disappointing Harman.
* April 2009: In response to the CQ story, Harman 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/harman_i_never_contacted_doj_on_aipac_case.php>denies
 
contacting DOJ on the AIPAC case, but not that 
the conversation with the "suspected Israeli 
agent" occurred.

Bombshell: Rep. Jane Harman Caught on Tape 
Agreeing to Lobby for Alleged AIPAC/Israel Spies?

By Jeremy Scahill, Rebel Reports
Posted on April 20, 2009, Printed on April 21, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://rebelreports.com//137494/

This is a huge story: Representative Jane Harman, 
a hawkish, influential "Blue Dog" Democrat "was 
overheard on an NSA wiretap telling a suspected 
Israeli agent that she would lobby the Justice 
Department reduce espionage-related charges 
against two officials of the American Israeli 
Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful 
pro-Israel organization in Washington," according 
to a 
<http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=hsnews-000003098436>report 
from CQ Politics:
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."
The case, known as the AIPAC espionage scandal 
centers around allegations that at least two 
AIPAC staff members passed sensitive US 
intelligence on Iran, provided by Pentagon 
official Lawrence Franklin, to Israel. In early 
2006, Franklin pled guilty to espionage-related 
charges and was sentenced to 13 years in prison. 
The case against two indicted AIPAC staffers, 
Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, is ongoing.
Allegations that Harman intervened in this case 
in an effort to win the spot as chair of the 
Intelligence Committee have been widespread 
<http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069,00.html>since 
2006, but an FBI investigation into Harman was 
dropped for "lack of evidence." As CQ Politics 
reports:
What is new is that Harman is said to have been 
picked up on a court-approved NSA tap directed at 
alleged Israel covert action operations in 
Washington.
And that, contrary 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 break in The New York Times and 
engulf the White House.
When Justice Department officials reviewed the 
transcript of the wiretaps on Rep. Harman, its 
attorneys determined she had committed a 
"completed crime," which, according to CQ 
Politics is "a legal term meaning that there was 
evidence that she had attempted to complete it." 
The Justice Department attorneys wanted to open a 
case on her, but they needed the green light from 
top intel officials to confirm it rightly 
constituted a national security investigation. 
Porter Goss, who was then the CIA director 
reportedly approved the investigation and was 
preparing to notify then-Minority Leader Nancy 
Pelosi and House Speaker Dennis Hastert and, 
through them, Harman herself:
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."
Pelosi and Hastert never did get the briefing.
And thanks to grateful Bush administration 
officials, the investigation of Harman was 
effectively dead.
On his Salon 
<http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/20/harman/>blog 
today Glenn Greenwald points out:
Jane Harman, in the wake of the NSA scandal, 
became probably the 
<http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/harman-its-not.html>most 
crucial defender of the Bush warrantless 
eavesdropping program, using her status as "the 
ranking Democratic on the House intelligence 
committee" to 
<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1145222,00.html?promoid=rss_nation>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 
<http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/2/12/122953.shtml?s=ic>strongly 
suggested that the whistleblowers who exposed the 
lawbreaking and perhaps even the New York Times 
(but not Bush officials) should be criminally 
investigated, 
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11272634/page/2/>saying 
she "deplored the leak," that "it is tragic that 
a lot of our capability is now across the pages 
of the newspapers," and 
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11272634/page/6/>that 
the whistleblowers were 
"despicable."  And Eric Lichtblau himself 
described how Harman, in 2004, 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/key_dem_urged_nyt_reporter_aga.php>attempted
 
very aggressively to convince him not to write 
about the NSA program.
There may be some who attempt to portray Harman 
as a victim of blackmail by Gonzales (and the 
wiretapping of members of Congress-and other 
Americans- should be thoroughly investigated) but 
Harman is a right wing Democrat who was often in 
sync with the heinous policies of the Bush 
administration. Over at TalkingPointsMemo, Josh 
Marshall raises some interesting 
<http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/04/must_read_5.php>issues 
on this story, particularly relating to the 
wiretap itself:
Among the many questions the story raises are 
some that Harman should probably answer, but not 
all. High on my list would be finding out more 
about the circumstances under which a member of 
Congress ended up having her phone conversations 
recorded by the NSA. The article suggests it was 
a by-the-books wiretap - part of a 
highly-classified probe of Israeli agents in the 
US, which led to the indictments of two AIPAC 
employees - and not one of the 'warrantless' 
ones. But we've seen so much funny business on 
that front that I'm not sure that's enough 
information.
In a prepared statement, Harman said: "These 
claims are an outrageous and recycled canard, and 
have no basis in factŠ I never engaged in any 
such activity. Those who are peddling these false 
accusations should be ashamed of themselves."
Jeremy Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The 
Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army.
© 2009 Rebel Reports All rights reserved.
View this story online at: 
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://rebelreports.com//137494/



A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. 
<http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221621490x1201450102/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DAprilfooter421NO62>See
 
yours in just 2 easy steps!

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
newsfromunderground-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

<<inline: clip_image001 18.gif>>

_______________________________________________
PDLA mailing list
p...@svpal.org
http://mailman.svpal.org/mailman/listinfo/pdla

Reply via email to