« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Harman Calls For Release Of Wiretapping Materials
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) has just released a letter she sent to Attorney General Eric Holder. Harman calls on Holder to give her all materials related to the government wiretapping of her, and to the investigation into her, so that she can release them publicly.
Harman also, crucially, takes her denial further than yesterday, saying she never contacted either DOJ or the White House or anyone else to seek favorable treatment for anyone.
Here's the statement her office just sent out:
HARMAN CALLS ON DOJ TO RELEASE ALL MATERIALS RELATED TO POSSIBLE WIRETAPPED CONVERSATIONS~ Says "It is my intention to make this material available to the public" ~
Washington, DC - Following below is a copy of a letter Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-CA) sent to Attorney General Eric Holder today:
April 21, 2009
Dear General Holder:
I am outraged to learn from reports leaked to the media over the last several days that the FBI or NSA secretly wiretapped my conversations in 2005 or 2006 while I was Ranking Member on the House Intelligence Committee.
This abuse of power is outrageous and I call on your Department to release all transcripts and other investigative material involving me in an unredacted form. It is my intention to make this material available to the public.
I also urge you to take appropriate steps to investigate possible wiretapping of other Members of Congress and selective leaks of investigative material which can be used for political purposes. As you know, it is entirely appropriate to converse with advocacy organizations and constituent groups, and I am concerned about a chilling effect on other elected officials who may find themselves in my situation.
Let me be absolutely clear: I never contacted the Department of Justice, the White House or anyone else to seek favorable treatment regarding the national security cases on which I was briefed, or any other cases. You may be aware that David Szady, the FBI's former top counterintelligence official, is quoted in the media saying of me "...in all my dealings with her, she was always professional and never tried to intervene or get in the way of any investigation."
Sincerely,
JANE HARMAN
Josh
Zachary
That's the problem when you're caught on tape saying a "conversation never happened."
She says it "never happened."
Ummmm.... dearie, it's not gonna convince people!
April 21, 2009 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thera:
With due respect, your comment reflects precisely the reason why Harmon has asked for the release of the entire transcript in total. At that point it would not matter what people believe, because the entire transcript will be there for all to see, as opposed to certain leaked excerpts courtesy of the type of behavior we used to castigate the Republicans for. Harmon's saying let the sunshine in; I think that's where progressives should land on this issue, regardless of what one's thoughts are about Israel or any of its more right wing lobbying advocates. It's the ethical alternative under these circumstances, and I think she's placed the ball squarely in the court of Mr. Holder, and she has done so very fairly and effectively. Where we come from, both of us, one is not guilty until proven innocent. Let us never, ever, ever forget that.
Bruce
April 21, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bruce, leave my Congress Woman alone!
... Just kidding. Agree, we can read the transcripts and go from there. Although from my vantage point in home district, it doesn't look very good.
April 21, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey traitor:
How could anything not look good out there in LA? :)
April 21, 2009 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bruce,
I don't think anyone believes that all the tapes/transcripts will be released and released unredacted and that's what Harmen may be banking on if she's guilty of some sort of political shennanigans.
The best defense is a good offense.
By the way, that cretin Cheney is also calling for the release of files regarding torture.
But then again, Cheney is a lying sack of sh*t.
April 21, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps John, but that seems like kind of a thin and sorry reed to take solace in for those of us who are into due process. Do we allow for Representative Harman to be dragged through the mud on the basis of a partiallyeaked transcript? Sounds Nixonesque. Sounds to me like lots of folks are changing the standards of proof upon which this nation is built for expedient purposes, i.e. Harmon's guilty until she's proven innocent. Well, she may be guilty of being too close to AIPAC, and let the chips fall where they may on that one, but I like to think we elected a new president to follow a new direction, one that returns us to fundamental principles of decency, due process and dignity.
I'm now starting to get interested in this one. :)
Cheers John.
April 21, 2009 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bruce,
of course I'll wait till the jury is in but the years of watching Congress and the White House have made me way too cynical.
There are a number of politicians who I have a negative feeling/opinion about and this negativity has been born by seeing them a number of times in the House or Senate or being interviewed on various TV shows. I can't point to anything in particular, as the feeling is the result of seeing these people in action over the years. As for Democrats, Harmen is one of those people, and an example of another is Harold Ford.
Even Barney Frank lost some of his glow over the last two years.
Paul Wellstone was my North Star but he died on me. Bernie Sanders is now my favorite.
April 21, 2009 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, she and Blaggo can take that show on the road. Although, they both are going to have hair issues in the jungles of Costa Rica.
April 21, 2009 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I want to know is whether Holder really can release this information. Isn't it classified? If it is classified, Harman would certainly know it can't be released, so the obvious question becomes whether the outrage is just for show? (I have to admit I'm biased here, given Harman's support for Bush's wireless wiretapping program, I can't help but see this as a sort of poetic justice.)
April 21, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wordie:
I'm not sure if or why the tapes of her conversations would be classified; have you read that anywhere? It is possible that they might be unavailable for evidentiary reasons to the extent that there was an open investigation into any alleged illegal activity on her part or something like that. Of course, this all happened in 2005 or 06 so I'm not sure there's any open criminal investigation. My point is that I think, whatever one thinks of her or AIPAC, it seems like this kind of a leak is suspect and star chamber like (and of course would be criminal if the entire transcript was classified as you suggest it might be.
BTW, keep in mind that Harman was apparently the lone objector to the Bush Administration on torture policy in 2002--in contrast to Pelosi, Rockefeller and other Democrats. I think she has a mixed record.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/4/21/92342/1552
How does her position on warrantless wiretapping differ than Obama's by the way.
April 21, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the questions needing an answer are:
Who initiated the "leak" and
What is the underlying agenda?
I am certainly not a Harman supporter, but this looks more and more as if someone found a way to tweak your teet.
Douse yourself with some (41 degree) water and start again, please.
April 21, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Harman's defense emerges: Sure, she may have made an improper quid pro quo agreeement, but she never actually paid the quid.
April 21, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
"As you know, it is entirely appropriate to converse with advocacy organizations and constituent groups, and I am concerned about a chilling effect on other elected officials who may find themselves in my situation."
(i.e., the other Israeli moles)
April 21, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harman:
AND...
I did not have sex with that woman!
April 21, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
RB, this is obviously related to the Steve Rosen/AIPAC trial, which has been postponed all these years, for political reasons, and is set to start next week.
I'd ask the FBI to go one further, and release the results of the investigation Harman was ensnared in, because that is the meat of this leak. Perhaps it will come out at the Rosen trial, if it isn't postponed again.
And Honorable Ms. Harman, if everything is so aboveboard, the public would like to know why you would have to say 'this conversation never happened'? Obviously, she was aware that this was far from an innocent conversation.
April 21, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe she had subsequent conversations with various people (like her staff?) who persuaded her that pursuing this path would not vault her into the chair of the committee that she so coveted and would, ummm, cross a certain line that could not be walked back. Maybe threats were made to Ms. Pelosi before she had a chance to "waddle in" and . . . you can imagine what happened next.
Just because the lead wasn't pursued doesn't mean Ms. Harman is a paragon of virtue and ethics. But sure, let's have the transcript.
April 21, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was the tap on her or the other party?
If a Congressperson speaks with a mobster, is there some kind of expectation of privacy?
What was the tap nominally for? Was this a "data analysis" tap (say, a key word or voice pattern pickup) or a specific warranted tap as part of a specific series targetting either party?
Does "never happened" mean "let's pretend but let's go ahead anyway," or does it by contrast mean "this is a bad idea, I'm not going through with it"?
Is the Israeli agent a mere lobbyist or a "foreign agent"?
...
April 21, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure now she wants everything made public. In 2004 when there was an election on and voters might, perhaps, have been interested in knowing that the Bush administration had decided it could privately negate laws and constitutional limits like, oh, the 4th Amendment, she was all for secrecy.
Ms. Harmon aided the Bush admin in breaking the law and in getting itself re-elected and I have no doubt at all she'll walk away scott free from betraying both her colleagues and her oath of office. If only it had been the 2nd Amendment they'd decided to suspend. That would get a reaction.
April 21, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except this wiretap was with a FISA court warrant.
April 21, 2009 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know about the Harman wiretap, but it was the warrantless wiretapping program that she pressed the NYT to refrain from reporting about. Bill Keller, the executive editor of the NYT has just confirmed: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/us/politics/21harman.html
Whew...talk about karma!
April 21, 2009 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh? Why? Why do you want to help the terrorists? Touch S*T, lady. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
April 21, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jane Harman is my Congresswoman. It used to be Henry Waxman when I lived in Santa Monica. As Colonel Kurtz would say, "The Horror!"
April 21, 2009 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two points.
First. I'm sure it would be very difficult to stay in front of something like this if you are legitimately in the dark but her reactions seem to lack the ring of truth. Her initial response was "this is all old news". And then after a couple of days "I am outraged, this is the first I'm hearing of this". If it really was news to her, wouldn't the wiretapping jump out at her immediately? It really sounds like she is going through the "which story spins" evolution.
Second. Can we stop saying "bring it on" already? The front page of TPM has the phrase in two back to back posts on completely different subjects. Our recent history is littered with politicians taking the stance - Bush talking about insurgents in Iraq, Palin on trooper gate and Blago all over the place. Can't we drop the cowboy, action hero, "yippie-kai-yay motherf..er" posturing? From now on, whenever a politician says "bring it on" let's all stare at them blankly and ask "you mean like the cheerleading movie?"
(Similarly, next time somebody tells a racist/sexist/bigoted joke, pause and then say "I don't get it". "What do you call a Polish Nobel Laureate?" "umm ... Marie Curie?" She won two.)
April 21, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you call a Polish piano player?
ummm.....Frederic Chopin? :-)
April 21, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink