by D amozel | Josh Marshall at TPM said it: "This story is so radioactive it's hard to know which of fifty different directions to go with it." Details are here. The part that's new is the allegation that Harman was caught on tape discussing favors to be had and returned during a wiretap, along with an implication that the Bush administration might have used this as leverage to get her to come in on its side on the warrantless wiretapping controversy. Reading the CQ Politics report on this, as Marshall points out in a subsequent piece, one could certainly infer that Harman was going to side with the administration on warrantless wiretapping anyway, and that Gonzalez intervened "because the administration needed her out there spinning the warrantless wiretap story on their behalf."
Man, I don't even know where to start: with the alleged [she denies it] line-crossing by Harman; with the surveillance by the Bush administration of members of Congress; or with the continuing saga of the previous administration's well-documented disposition to treat "justice" as exceedingly subordinate to political advantage. For me, I think it's the last one of these -- and indeed Greenwald calls this "the crux."
Anyway, I'll set aside the crux for a moment to set out the gist:
The story suggests that the tapes show Harman crossed the line. And the gears were in motion to open a full blown investigation. But then Alberto Gonzales intervened and shutdown the whole thing. (TPM)
The allegations that Harman did a deal with AIPAC to help them with the espionage cases against two highly placed officials are, of course, old news, along with the fact that the FBI dropped the case due to "lack of evidence." See CQ Politics.
Harman has angrily denied the allegations. But, as CQ Pol suggests, these accounts -- if true, or rather, if sufficiently credible to be believed by her fellow Dems -- "go a long way toward explaining not only why Harman was denied the gavel of the House Intelligence Committee, but failed to land a top job at the CIA or Homeland Security Department in the Obama administration."
One thing is clear: Harman's advocacy of warrantless wiretapping. Greenwald provides a short history:
But there is most definitely an interesting wrinkle here, another aspect which is pointed out at Emptywheel.
First, as it happens the AIPAC trial is in a very active stage right now, with both sides submitting schedules in preparation for a May 6 and 7 CIPA hearing that may end up giving the AIPAC defendants access to classified material with which to defend themselves; if the government faces setbacks in that CIPA hearing, I think it likely that the government gives up the case. If I were a law enforcement guy whose case was crumbling, I might gin up some press attention to convince people of the value of the case.
So I find it interesting that the three sources for this story want to talk about Harman, but not the AIPAC guy on the other end of the call.
Hmmmm, yes....
On the other hand....Scott at LGM says, and it is getting progressively (no pun intended) to argue, that this simply confirms that Harman is "reactionary and corrupt":
Harman would seem to have combined being wrong about pretty much every important issue for years with the kind of corruption Hastings was accused of. I will have to agree with John that it's a real shame that Harman's retention as Intelligence chair was derailed by anti-Semitic hippies....
In response, Matt Weiner commented:
What kind of useless Democrat do you have to be for Alberto Gonzales to protect you?
If that's what he did, I think we all know the answer to that one.
Sullivan asks:
Is it more of a scandal that the Bushies were wire-tapping Harman and then were in a position to blackmail her if she didn't provide public support for ... their warrantless wire-tapping? Or is it just another day at the office for AIPAC?
RECENT BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS
Updated: Did the Bush Administration Condone Torture? (Warning: horrifying details included)
Is Israel About to Bomb Iran's Nuclear Sites?
News Round-Up: EPA Finds "Compelling and Overwhelming" Evidence that Warming Gases Threaten Public Health and Welfare
Sullivan: "If You Want to Know How Democracies Die, Read These Memos"; Olbermann and Others to Obama: "Prosecute, Mr. President"
Comments