« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Did Goss Target Harman?
In our last post on the Jane-Harman/AIPAC story, we noted growing evidence that Bush administration officials worked aggressively to prevent Congress from learning about Harman's wiretapped conversation with that suspected Israeli agent. But Ron Kampeas of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency had an (unfortunately titled) post late last week that took things in a very different, but equally interesting, direction.
Kampeas conducts a close reading of a New York Times report on the affair from last week to make a strong case that it was Porter Goss, then the CIA director, who took the initiative in going after Harman after hearing her on the wiretap, by trying to have authorized a separate wiretap of the lawmaker herself.
Kampeas:
Piecing this doozy together requires jumping from the lede in the NYT story, way way down. But look:WASHINGTON -- The director of the Central Intelligence Agency concluded in late 2005 that a conversation picked up on a government wiretap was serious enough to require notifying Congressional leaders that Representative Jane Harman, Democrat of California, could become enmeshed in an investigation into Israeli influence in Washington, former government officials said Thursday.
Now skip 9 grafs:
Former officials said that Mr. Goss had first seen the transcripts of Ms. Harman's phone conversations in late 2005, when the government was renewing its requests to a special court to wiretap the calls of the Israeli operative, whom they would not identify. Ms. Harman was not the target of the eavesdropping but her conversations were picked up because she spoke with the Israeli agent.
Note the operative verbs: Lede: It was Goss who "concluded" that the tap required more action. He drew this conclusion not because Harman's alleged involvement was raised with him, but during a periodic review of material supposedly incriminating an entirely different person. Tenth graf: The review is when the transcripts were "first seen" by Goss. As in, no one had bothered to bring it to Goss' attention before. Maybe because it wasn't all that.
Or:
Operatives tracking Israeli guy (let's call him "Bob") routinely listen in on his calls. The Bob operatives need to run their transcripts by a court periodically to renew the wiretap. Porter Goss reviews the request (as a matter of routine? or did he know something?) and says, wait a minute. This involves Jane!
Or, perhaps, "This involves JANE, bwahahaha."
As Kampeas notes, Goss and Harman had a history of tension. She had led an aggressive probe of the Duke Cunningham scandal, which brought down CIA Number 3 Dusty Foggo, who had been appointed by Goss. Fallout from the scandal eventually contributed to Goss's forced resignation as CIA chief in 2006.
So by this reading, Goss saw a chance to go after an opponent, but was eventually stymied by other Bush officials like Gonzales and Negroponte -- not that their own motives were necessarily pure. And, again by this reading, it's sources close to Goss that have been driving the story from the start.
We also recommend the last part of Kampeas' post, where he says nice things about our coverage of the story.
Josh
Zachary
VERY
April 27, 2009 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting!
April 27, 2009 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a interesting coincidence -- to add to the 'growing' unanswered questions:
From emptywheel:
April 27, 2009 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the Q & A Stein held after the story came out, I asked him about some of this. Re: my question as to why the FBI would go to Goss, he said that his sources were telling him [what sounded to me like an unlikely story] that when the normal renewal with the FISA Court for the FBI intercept was coming up, Mueller was out of town and unavailable and that's how they ended up going to Goss.
Since then there has been the alternative storyline being floated that Goss was pulled in bc of rules requiring the briefing of Congressional leadership (not so much the FISCt application that was being processed)
With respect to the FISCt application, I don't think that Gonzales would have had to "go to" anyone to prevent that application from going through - he could just not sign off on it and I think that there's no way the FISCt is going to give a tap authorization for a sitting member of Congress, esp one on the intel committee, without the AG signing off or some stellar emergency setting.
OTOH, on the "notify leadership" front, it might be that if Goss really wanted to do that - notify leadership, Gonzales might have had to intervene and use his "I need Jane" line. And you have to wonder, if Hastert had also been picked up on FBI transcripts as some thing based on statemetns by Sibel Edmonds, it would be a little extra ticklish to have Hastert being "briefed"
In any event, the other iffy part of all this is that even with a legal wiretap, there should have been minimization procedures in effect with respect to picking up conversations with a US citizen on US soil. How those minimization procedures which were likely reflected in a FISCt order, would have allowed the full conversation with a non-target sitting US Congressperson to be picked up, transcribed, circulated so that multiple sources are familiar with it, etc. is an interesting area.
I'd say that when Harman calls for the release of the transcripts, she might have reasons to believe that if the transcripts still exist (on someone not a target and never made a target) then someone may be in violation of minimization orders from the FISCt. And you may have a game of chicken in part - if the transcripts are anted up, someone may be in violation of a court minimization order(and courts are getting less affable about the DOJ's decision that the courts are their lapdogs); if the transcripts are not anted up, then Harman can bluff away on not having had the conversation.
April 27, 2009 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rozen also confirmed what Stein said:
My understanding, I could be wrong, is that there were two warrant requests? One was a renewal for the wiretapping of the suspected Israeli spy, and the other was to proceed with an investigation into Harman's 'completed crime' -- I believe this is when things got shelved?
The next call we hear about is again the caller being the 'suspected Israeli spy' telling Harman that "Pelosi went ballastic." Note, what we are not getting are any leaks about a possible trail of Harman's calls when she may or may not have tried to intervene in the AIPAC trial?
Wouldn't that have been covered with the original FISA warrant tracking the suspected Israeli spy that obviously may have contacts both here and overseas?
I must admit the when and how Pelosi knew about Harman is also rather strange, as well as Hastert apparently saying it was him that alerted Pelosi about Harman being picked up on a wiretap... weird...
Also, I think, I'm not sure, only the NYTimes is saying Pelosi now says she was told/knew about it in 2006 not 2005?
The Hill
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/hoyer-backs-harman-call-for-investigation-2009-04-22.html
If the DoJ decides not go ahead with the AIPAC trial -- I hope there is a way the transcripts can be released, and at the very least an "ethical" investigation carried out it the transcripts are real.
April 27, 2009 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
looooool!
unfortunate title, indeed. It reminds me of the one at TPM that was entitled "Obama Apes Bush on National Security" (which the title was "fixed" by TPM, but the pagename/linktarget wasn't when i saw)
at least the "Jane got fingered" one was really funny
April 27, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
interesting stuff here Zach, nice job.
Porter Goss, the Yale secret society member was always a known POS. If one doesn't expect the absolute worst from the neo-con Bush crew, these gangsters, it must be born of ignorance. (not direted at anybody, just a general statement of their all encompassing evil and criminality)
Mike Malloy was always dead on with saying "Bush Crime Family" - it has always been this way.
The single worst moment of the Bush Administration to me was when Pelosi took impeachment off the table.
That was literally telling the most powerful crime family/organization ever that they did not have to follow the laws.
We all got what Pelosi/Reid/Hoyer/Rockefeller gave us, on purpose. Illegal wars, illegal torture, illegal spying, and Porter Goss criminal types all through the federal government in all departments, at all levels.
Bottom line is: Harmon is guilty of treason, Goss is a crook, and they are both on the same level as Pelosi. Harmon is like Karl Rove, a traitor in our midst, using the public trust to abuse their power. Rove outs one of our spies, and Harmon is/works for a spy. Pelosi promises in public that a government official is not restricted by any laws anymore....
what did y'all think was gonna happen? why is any of this a slight suprise? this is millimeters of the lightyears of crimes that high government officials commit, because they have given themselves impunity. Our corporate press certainly can't leave Nantucket long enough to give a shit, and now Obama looks to continue the lawless trend, with Orwellian slogans sublimely orated
Look to Future is good, Looking back is bad
who cares about any of this anyway, it happened in the past....
April 27, 2009 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
April 27, 2009 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
'Impeachment is off the Table' Don't foget Cardinal US Senator Edward Kennedy very Main Stream Media concurring support of 'Impeachment is off the Table' 'the Country cannot take it'.
Also, check US Senator Grassely Votes in the US Senate.
Also these US Senators are also highly noted and acknowledged as so-called 'Whistleblower Advocates' and Co-Sponsers of past Whistleblower Legislation.
Is anyone in our Main Steam Media or any Media Reading and Listening?
Where is Ms. Amy Goodman, 'DemocracyNow.org' Radio and Television Show 'Please call or e-mail us with Story Ideas? and/or 'Connect the Dots' Leila Garrett with Congressman Dennis Kucinich as a frequent regular guest?
Is this some type of Brainwashing and with (ongoing Nixon Pardons and non-prosecutions, Regan and Bush era(s) of non-prosecution!! ecetra!!) and/or with a complete lack of respect for God, Man and Country and within our US Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration for Life, Liberty and Happiness for All.
With continued appearance to suggest to ignore (Illegal) War(s), murder(s), wrongful death(s), torture(s) (Domestic and International), Loss of Habeas Corpus, Wrongful Wiretaps, Wrongful Secrets, (massive) Corruption, seemingly many and/or all 'Oversight and Accountability' applications and endeavors thereof, ecetra.
Is it correct that it is the same complicit and/or continuing 'Pack of Lies' and/or 'Change We Must Believe In' from the entire Administrative Leadership and not the faith for the hope for the 'Change We Can Believe In'?
Is this seemingly a Dispicable, Sad, Appalling and Disgusting comprehension and/or without the ability thereof??!!
Please recall 'Dr. Martin Luther King many statements on Complicity and in-action and/or avoidance of proper and forthright action.'
Also, Hopefully the Leadership will immediately (THIS WEEK!!!!) apply and implement the 'Change We Can Believe In' with the immediate US LEGISLATIVE, FULL FLOOR VOTE of the Identical S1385/HR985 Bills 'FEDERAL EMPLOYEE WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ENHANCEMENT RESTORATION ACT' and not the continued support for the continued intolerable Corrupt Policies, Practices and Procedures of the previous Administration(s) and Leadership(s) thereof, as applicable!!!!!
As you may recall our entire US Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government seemingly have always fully supported this 'Veto Proof' Bill, including as recently as these Identical Legislative Bills of S1385 in 2003/4/5/6 and HR985 in 2007/8/9.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
April 27, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
It sure appears worthwhile that the following is included;
Where is/are Judicary Committee Chairpersons John Conyers !! and House Speaker Nancy Palosi !! on the (ongoing ??!!) 7/2008 'Presidential Powers and Its Limitations'!! Empeachment Hearings !! (Testimony as the most important Hearing in the past Century!!) which should seemingly include Negraponte, fromer President Regan era et all (Wolfowitz?) 'School of the Americas' now 'The Institute of .....' ??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 27, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Somewhere I got lost in this discussion. What is an Israel Agent, are we talking a spy disguised as a member of AIPAC or just a member of AIPAC.
If a true spy would Harmon have know it.
Kind of interested in all the intrigue on this
April 27, 2009 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
still unknown... doesn't have to be AIPAC. But some people are thinking it might be a 'registered'? AIPAC lobbyist?
Maybe there should be an investigation.
April 27, 2009 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing really stands out.
"Former officials said that Mr. Goss had first seen the transcripts of Ms. Harman's phone conversations in late 2005..."
Note the "s" attached to the words "transcripts" and "Conversations!
How many were there?
April 28, 2009 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Fallout from the scandal eventually contributed to Goss's forced resignation as CIA chief in 2006."
Correct me if Im wrong, but here's what I remember;
One item that arose in the Cunningham scandal was poker parties that were being held at the Watergate Hotel. The word was there was poker, booze, food and...hookers. Porter Goss was mentioned in at least one story as a participant in these poker games and it was almost immediately after the story connectimg him and the poker games appeared that he retired from the CIA.
April 28, 2009 8:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget that a poker game would be a really good way to transfer cash (bribes) to government executives
April 28, 2009 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kampeas is to be lauded for picking out this possible malfeasance, this petulant backlash at Harman for... what?... quashing Goss' poker n' pokin' with Duke and the boys at the Watergate? But he's also hammered the theme that Harman is the victim in this seedy escapade. It's more than a little disconcerting to watch TPM follow in this inadvertent - or deliberate - misdirection.
April 28, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Curt:
From the information released so far it is very possible that Harman was being set up for a fall.
Especially if you consider the possibility that whoever was on the AIPAC end of that phone line knew that it was wiretapped.
Given the amount of Israeli infiltration into the US Government, that is entirely possible.
One of the things which really hasn't been answered is why would anyone in either AIPAC or the Israeli embassy go to Harman (a Democrat) for help with the Bush Administration? There were plenty of high ranking Republicans available to do that work.
.
April 29, 2009 7:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for sharing this very informative review.
This seems to share relevant ideas and opinions so that the people would know.
Web Hosting Reviews
August 18, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink