Too bad she wasn't interviewed by a real reporter like David Shuster.

Harmon is right: It is a gross abuse of power for the NSA to catch her promising to interfere into the investigation of espionage. How dare the National Security Agency do that!

Her defense is quite damning: "Harman said she had no need to make a quid pro quo with AIPAC. "I have a long friendship with AIPAC. I didn't need to cut some deal with AIPAC."

A Soul Already Sold is Not For Sale.

We'll see.

The New York Times's role in all this is fascinating. After Harmon,et. al. (Bush officials) asked the Times man in DC to not publish the illegal spying on US citizens report, it did not publish it for a whole year. Despicable.

Oh, sweet irony! Poor, poor Jane has been wiretapped, and now she's doing this for all us little people...oh, right, she was all *for* wiretapping us little people, until it happened to her, and now she's outraged!

Also, I notice she makes it sound like it was illegal, but it was FISA court-approved. She was obviously consorting with some individuals whom the FBI deemed dirty, so, as they say, lie with dogs, wake up with fleas.

Wow. That was a whole load of vaporware she was hawking there. Nowhere in that did she hit on anything approaching an actual denial of substance of what is alleged. I love how she tries to make a point that because this wiretapping might have occurred after after 2005 is somehow relevant.

Add to that the crocodile tears about how it is horrific that she, an innocent American, got wiretapped and how that is an abuse of power. Well no shit you dumb twit. And it is an abuse of power when the NSA wiretaps me, or any pother American, yet that is what you went to bat to allow the Bush administration to do.

Of course the big difference between Harman and me (or anyone else here) is that I am not caught on a wiretap trying to interfere with a espionage investigation when the NSA is sifting through my conversation. Suck to be you Jane.

Her feigned outrage is self-inflicted petard hoisting writ large. Maybe she can begin to appreciate the reason why many of us on the left were screaming bloody murder at what Harman, Bush and our "leaders" were doing in the name of "national security". What a dumb-ass. She is like the Leona Helmsley of the House Intel Committee, being tapped by the NSA is only for the little people in her view it seems.

i love watching harman, who SO disrespects my fourth amendment rights, get hoist by her own petard.

"a gross abuse of power"? HAHA, talk about irony.

in fact, i'm goign to call her up and make fun of her right now.

The irony of Harman claiming the bully pulpit for the little people now that she has been caught out in a wiretap that she herself was at the time arguing for.

She also was asked by NSA chief Haden to have the NYT wiretap expose pulled thru their Washington Bureau Chief.

The NYT are being a little difficult in recalling whether her request to pull the story was in October or November 2004, as it would have ad an impact on the presidential race.
The piece ran in 2005.

Harman, if she had any integrity or shame would resign.
She has been found out as an AIPAC stooge and a Bushie surrogate intent on getting the committee chairmanship and prepared to sell her soul for such.

excuse me Congresswoman, they had a warrant. you were surveilled with a jusge looking over their shoulder, something you opted not to grant us

and we'll "bring it on !" when you release that piece of paper wherein Madame Speaker committed to giving you the committee chair, you know, quid pro quo

Careful what you wish for. . . .

She's on another planet. The wiretap took place while she was talking to AIPAC officials. And, it appears, according to the reporter at CQ, the NSA had a warrant to wiretap AIPAC officials (likely because Stephen Rosen was being hit with charges of espionage). They weren't targeting Harman (though you have to admit that it crossed your mind that the Bushies got the AIPAC calendar and thought, "hmm. Jane Harman is coming in tomorrow, let's see what they're going to discuss.").

I have a tendency to agree with tmdf - but my reason is that Dems underestimate the republicans. They may be out of power but corporatioins still control the media and corporations are run by rich white republican men. The dems have a harder time getting their message out and are not as vociferous as republicans.

Lousgirl, both you and TMDF are incorrect. 1) Who says the Republicans have their house in order? Even when they were in power, Tom DeLay, Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, Denny Hastert and others screwed up big time ... or were finally caught being the crooks they always were. 2) We "underestimate the Republicans" who are out of power? How? Did the Republicans want to get this story out? Really?

The self proclaimed "best Republican in the Democratic Party" may have just been found out to be one the most arrogant in Democratic Party as well.

It's time the CA 36th took her to task and threw her out on her Joe Lieberman lying butt.

The CA 36th is no place for a Blue Dog, let alone a rabid one.

I have a deep, dark suspicion that Harman is just another unpaid agent of a foreign government who has infiltrated our government. This possibility doesn't surprise me, it merely makes me more and more suspect of our foreign policy.