Jane Harman denies CQ report she was heard on NSA wiretap lobbying for AIPAC officials

[sabra]

Source: LA Times

Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice) has long denied allegations that she lobbied the Justice Department to reduce spying charges against top officials at the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the powerful pro-Israel advocacy group.

According to the original story, Harman was said to have promised this lobbying help to a suspected Israeli agent in exchange for his assistance in getting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to award her chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee -- a post Harman has long coveted.

But CQ's Jeff Stein, quoting intelligence sources, today added a new wrinkle to the allegations. He reported that Harman was heard on a National Security Agency wiretap telling the Israeli agent she would “waddle into” the AIPAC case “if you think it’ll make a difference.” And that she apparently ended her conversation with that ever-popular farewell among friends, “This conversation doesn’t exist.”

Harman issued a furious rebuttal today. In a prepared statement, she said:

These claims are an outrageous and recycled canard, and have no basis in fact. I never engaged in any such activity. Those who are peddling these false accusations should be ashamed of themselves.

Read more: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/04/jane-harman-denies-cq-report-she-was-caught-on-nsa-wiretap-lobbying-for-aipac-officials.html

[tekisui]

1. Well, if the conversations were tapped, its on record somewhere,right?

[robinlynne]

4. yep, and apparently verified by several different sources.

And if someone accused me of inappropriate, bordeirng on crimina, behavior I wouldn't say: "you should be ashamed of yourself". if I were innocent, I would be a bit more forceful with my reply.

[leftynyc]

2. If she's on tape

that'll be the end of this. Where is the tape?

[Howardx]

3. sounds like aipac wrote her denial too

"These claims are an outrageous and recycled canard"

except that as we see, they are not.

[JDPriestly]

8. Why do you say, "as we see, they are not."

Do you have a link to the evidence on this story?

[Howardx]

9. i do not doubt the truthfulness of this story

try your smokescreen elsewhere.

[leftynyc]

18. You believe it simply because you

want to. And since when is asking for proof of an accusation a smokescreen? Where is the proof?

[Howardx]

19. so?

what i believe or dont believe is none of your business.

[leftynyc]

21. What a bizarre thing to

say on a message board. And I'll ask again since you skipped answering...where is the proof?

[Howardx]

22. why do you expect "proof" today?

you seem anxious to quash this.

[leftynyc]

24. Asking for proof is quashing?

Keep living there in bizarro land.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SOS]

49. Harman's "denial" damaged in NYT story 4/21/09

The Harman story was on the front page of The New York Times today:

"Ms. Harman denied Monday having ever spoken to anyone in the Justice Department about Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, the two former analysts for Aipac. Her office issued a statement saying, “Congresswoman Harman has never contacted the Justice Department about its prosecution of present or former Aipac employees.”

The statement did not, however, address whether Ms. Harman had contacted anyone at the White House or had participated in phone calls in which she was asked to intervene in exchange for help in being named chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/us/politics/21harman.html

Seems that her "denial" issued yesterday was crafted very carefully.

[aquart]

13. Excuse me?

What a biased and disgusting assumption. Because the Jews control all and all are puppets in their hands?

Yours was a completely unnecessary remark fueled by nothing but a smug hatred.

[Sezu]

28. Oh have YOU heard the tape? If not why pretend you know it's

for real? Oh, I know; it involves a swipe at AIPAC. Is that the new Progressive way? Guilty until proven innocent? Sounds awfully extreme right wing to me. Have you converted?

[Soylent Brice]

5. what a weird story this is turning out to be.

[ellie]

6. Who you gonna believe?

Me or your lying ears?

[TheDebbieDee]

10. GMTA!

I came in here to post just what you said!

[leftynyc]

25. Have you heard the tape?

They need to release the tape.

[ShareTheWoods]

7. Show us the tape or drop it.

If the tape exists then get on with it. Hearsay does not cut it.

[MasonJar]

11. Apparently this leak is not hearsay, but info from insiders. Pelosi

would not choose Harman to lead the important Intelligence Committee and so now it is clear that this info has been out there for some time.

[hlthe2b]

27. Harman has been so very accomodating of the Bushies*

that I am inclined to believe this report.... She needs to get to the bottom of this, if not. While I would normally be sympathetic to the difficulties in proving a "negative," (if that is the case), but in this case, it strikes me as "how convenient."

[bushmeister0]

12. Clearly, anyone who believes the Israelis are spying on us is

an anti-Semite. They're out allies, not foreign agents attempting to interfere in our domestic politics. {Sarcasm]

[defendandprotect]

14. Jane Harmon and AIPAC have to go -- !!!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. what else is going to dragged out of the swamp?

[dkofos]

16. Just another lying congresscritter.

[Hannah Bell]

17. D-Venice?

[Raine]

45. She's my representative in coastal Los Angeles County

which covers Malibu, Venice plus the beach cities in the South Bay (where I live).

[Hannah Bell]

47. i thought someone was having their little joke - venice being known for machiavellian politics, etc.

italy, that is.

[bemildred]

20. The right-blogosphere seems to want to pin this on Rahm.

It appears there is some anger about him being mean to Nuttyahoo.

I read a good deal of blather about lawbreakers at the top and leaking national secrets and such.

If the report is false, would it not also be false that there was some leak of secret transcripts of the false reports?

So either the report is true, or there could be no illegal security leak on which the report is based.

[Sezu]

29. Are you really that naive? That's like saying there has to be

SOME basis of truth in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

[bemildred]

30. Perhaps if you clarified what you said, I would be able to understand what you mean.

What is "that"? The "that" which is like ... PEOZ?

[Sezu]

39. "So either the report is true,

or there could be no illegal security leak on which the report is based.

The report does not have to be true at all nor do the reports of leaked security reports; someone could be "inventing," shit based on already dealt with smoke (reports, leaked info etc) which produced no fire; much like the way the Protocols worked."

Either/or fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

[bemildred]

42. But inventing is not a breach of national security.

I have no problem with the idea that this might be fiction, I'm just saying that if it's fiction, it is not a national security breach.

Contrariwise, if it is some form of national security breach, there must be something true behind it that was supposed to be secret.

Unless the government classifies lies, which I suppose is entirely possible too, and then the fact that it's a lie might be classified.

Thank you for clarifying.

[Howardx]

33. national secrets leaked?

how could that be when harman herself in her 2nd rebuttal attempt says these were all "widely known and unremarkable facts"?

[bemildred]

34. Another good point.

Not getting our story straight. The report itself needs confirming, though since it is being characterized now as "widely known facts", maybe that is happening. That is a change from the "all a pack of lies" that we first heard. Although it is possible to assert both that it is a pack of lies and that the contents are "widely known facts" I suppose.

[Howardx]

35. its the "thats old news" tactic

it should last through today at best.

[bemildred]

36. The First Rule of Italian Driving: "What is behind me is not important." nt

[Howardx]

37. no doubt.

im sure harman would rather look to the bright future rather than talk about old news.

[bemildred]

38. I intended no insult to Italians, who are fine drivers, all of them, of course.

There is quite a lot of past stuff that needs to not be scrutinized too closely these days too, it's a big job, even if you are diligent about overlooking things.

[Psephos]

48. lol n/t

[Sezu]

41. Did you or Howard AXXclown READ what STEIN himself said?

"As Stein said, "It’s true that allegations of pro-Israel lobbyists trying to help Harman get the chairmanship of the intelligence panel by lobbying and raising money for Pelosi aren’t new."

Go read Greenwald on it too

"Back in October, 2006, Time reported that the DOJ and FBI were investigating whether Harman and AIPAC "violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee" and "the probe also involves whether, in exchange for the help from AIPAC, Harman agreed to help try to persuade the Administration to go lighter on the AIPAC officials caught up in the ongoing investigation." So that part has been known since 2006."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/20/harman/

Since 2006!!!!!!!

NOW someone for SOME unknown reason is recycling it but attaching an UNHEARD tape by UNKNOWN sources. Yeah, that shit's ALWAYS reliable isn't it.....or do you think Obama's birth certificate or Christianity IS possibly a fraud?

Sheesh.

[bemildred]

43. Is this some sort of test?

Why not calm down? You'll be able to think better.

[Judi Lynn]

23. Watchdog Demands Harman Ethics Probe

Watchdog Demands Harman Ethics Probe
— By Nick Baumann | Mon April 20, 2009 11:28 AM PST

Is an ethics committee investigation in Rep. Jane Harman's future? DC-based watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics In Washington certainly thinks one is warranted, and just faxed faxed a letter to the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) requesting an investigation into Harman's role in alleged quid-pro-quo scheme. CQ reported late Sunday that the California Democrat was caught on an National Security Agency wiretap agreeing to lobby for the reduction of charges against two alleged Israeli spies in exchange for another suspected Israeli agent's help in convincing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) to name Harman to chairmanship of the House intelligence committee. Harman denies the allegations. "Harman deserves to be sanctioned...,' Melanie Sloan, CREW's executive director, told Mother Jones. "She was willing to use a criminal investigation as a tool just to get a chairmanship. Obviously there's political gamesmanship on Capitol Hill, but it has to end before you get to the Grand Jury store. That's really beyond the pale."

CREW also faxed a letter to the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) Monday afternoon, requesting an investigation into why no charges were pursued against Harman. CQ alleged in its story that an investigation of Harman was quashed because then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wanted the powerful Democrat's continued help defending the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program. "It looks like the Justice Department dropped the case not because they didn't have the evidence but for political reasons," Sloan says. "It's yet another example that would do anything to advance their agenda, that they treated the Justice system as a political tool."

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/04/watchdog-calling-ethics-investigation-rep-jane-harman-over-quid-pro-quo-allegations

[Joanne98]

31. I don't believe her. Sorry.

[orbitalman]

32. You mean you won't buy the Brooklyn bridge from me??

Oh dear.

[Sezu]

40. No but he MIGHT if he heard from a friend that a friend had

heard from another guy whose inside guy told him you were an up and up guy.

[IndianaGreen]

44. These wiretaps were legal, there was a warrant issued by FISA court

Harman's goose is cooked!

[bleever]

46. Do recycled canards go with the cans and bottles, or with the newspapers?

Always something new to learn.

[BeyondGeography]

50. "This conversation doesn't exist"...She's bad news

Glad they have the goods on her.