Tinoire
10-22-2006, 12:52 PM
Feds Probe a Top Democrat's Relationship with AIPAC
The Department of Justice is investigating whether Rep. Jane Harman and the pro-Israel group worked together to get her reappointed as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee
By TIMOTHY J. BURGER/WASHINGTON
Background: [link:www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,995099,00.html|A Web of Intrigue]
ARTICLE
Posted Friday, Oct. 20, 2006
Did a Democratic member of Congress improperly enlist the support of a major pro-Israel lobbying group to try to win a top committee assignment? That's the question at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors, who are examining whether Rep. Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, according to knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.
The sources tell TIME that the investigation by Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has simmered out of sight since about the middle of last year, is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman's behalf. Harman said Thursday in a voicemail message that any investigation of — or allegation of improper conduct by — her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous." On Friday, Washington GOP super lawyer Ted Olson left voicemail messages underscoring that Harman has no knowledge of any investigation. "Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you've had," Olson said. "She is not aware of any such investigation, does not believe that it is occurring, and wanted to make sure that you and your editors knew that as far as she knows, that's not true... . No one from the Justice Department has contacted her." It is not, however, a given that Harman would know that she is under investigation. In a follow-up phone call from California, Olson said Harman hired him this morning because she takes seriously the possibility of a media report about an investigation of her, even though she does not believe it herself.
(snip)
The case is a spin-off of a probe that has already led to charges under the Espionage Act against two AIPAC lobbyists, whose case is still pending, and to a 12-and-a-half-year prison sentence for former Defense Intelligence Agency official Lawrence A. Franklin. Franklin pleaded guilty a year ago to three felony counts involving improper disclosure and handling of classified information about the Middle East and terrorism to the two lobbyists, who in turn are accused of passing it on to a journalist and a foreign government, widely believed to be Israel. The two lobbyists, who have denied any wrongdoing but were dismissed by AIPAC in April of 2005, were indicted on felony counts of conspiring with government officials to receive classified information they were not authorized to have access to and providing national defense information to people not entitled to receive it.
(snip)
The sources say 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. If that happened, it might be construed as an illegal quid pro quo, depending on the context of the situation. But the sources caution that there has been no decision to charge anyone and that it is unclear whether Harman and AIPAC acted on the idea.
(snip)
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069-3,00.html
Jane Harman was lobbying AIPAC, instead of the other way around, to keep her seat? All these neocon puppets need to tossed out ASAP!
September 15, 2006
The Hoekstra-Harman Hoax
How the War Party plans to lie us into war – again
by Justin Raimondo
For the War Party, deception isn't just a tactic, or even a strategy – it's a lifestyle. That's why they're indifferent to getting caught. Like a hardened criminal arrested for his umpteenth felony, the neocons see brazen lying as just a routine procedure. Caught red-handed, they just move on to their next subterfuge, one invariably designed to drag us into war.
That is the only way to explain what Reps. Peter Hoekstra and Jane Harman thought they were doing when they released their "report" [link:intelligence.house.gov/Media/PDFS/IranReport082206v2.pdf|Recognizing Iran as a Strategic Threat: An Intelligence Challenge for the United States] (.pdf) on Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, which – as the International Atomic Energy Agency puts it – is chock full of "erroneous, misleading, and unsubstantiated information." In a [link:www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/document091406.pdf|letter] (.pdf) to House Intelligence Committee chairman Hoekstra, IAEA official Vilmos Cserveny takes "strong exception" to "incorrect and misleading" claims in the report that the IAEA fired an inspector, one Christopher Charlier, for giving the Iranians a hard time. He was let go, says the Hoekstra-Harman report, because he went up against an alleged policy "barring IAEA officials from telling the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program," as Hoekstra-Harman put it. This conspiracy theory is put to rest by Cserveny, who curtly informs the American Congress that Iran is fully within its rights, under the Nonproliferation Treaty, to ask for the replacement of one inspector out of over 200 which it has accepted.
Cserveny points out, as did some in the blogosphere when the report first came out, that the "weapons grade" enrichment described by Hoekstra-Harman as occurring at Natanz is a complete fabrication. Why, it was only last April, Cserveny reminds the esteemed members of the House, that the inspectors verified a 3.6 percent enrichment rate – not the 90 percent or more required to qualify as "weapons grade."
(snip)
The War Party has learned nothing and has no regrets, and this willful blindness is underscored by the latter half of the Hoekstra-Harman duo. Even as the Democrats rail against the "quagmire" in Iraq, and decry the conduct of that war, their leaders are intent on dragging us into yet another conflict, this time much bigger, and with far more mire.
Harman has referred to Israel's murderous assault on Lebanon as "draining the swamp," and her position on Iran isn't much better: Her [link:www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=32408|solution to the Iranian problem] is to "recruit a much more diverse group of spies with cultural sensitivity" – rather than rely on the IAEA. I see she's learned a thing or two since her "debate" with Richard Perle at AIPAC's 2005 shindig, when she fell over herself agreeing with the Dark Prince of the War Party, as [link:www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301565_pf.html|chronicled] by Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank:
[ul]"Perle drew cheers for denouncing Palestinian anti-Semitism and the French. Harman mentioned that an aide once worked for AIPAC, called her audience 'very sophisticated' and celebrated Yasser Arafat's death as 'a blessing.' Debating a hard-liner in front of a pro-administration crowd, Harman heaped praise on President Bush, calling the Iraqi elections 'sensationally impressive' and moving to 'applaud' or 'commend' Perle and the administration a dozen times. 'Richard is right, and so is President Bush,' she said at one point.
"But after half an hour of this, Harman could not keep up. Perle provoked cheers from the crowd when he favored a military raid on Iran, saying that 'if Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon, I think we will have no choice but to take decisive action.' When Harman said the 'best short-term option' is the UN Security Council, the crowd reacted with boos."
Harman and her Democratic colleagues have no dispute with the Republicans – and the far-right neocons epitomized by Perle – when it comes to Iran. Both are determined to protect Israeli interests, at the expense of American interests, by threatening to go to war if Iran continues to pursue its apparent goal of joining the nuclear club, along with its neighbors, Israel and Pakistan. Everybody knows that what John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt call "the Lobby" is behind the current campaign to gin up another Middle Eastern war, this time with Iran. Israel's recent incursion into Lebanon was but a dress rehearsal for the main event – which is coming no matter how badly the Lebanese adventure turns out.
(snip)
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9702
The Department of Justice is investigating whether Rep. Jane Harman and the pro-Israel group worked together to get her reappointed as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee
By TIMOTHY J. BURGER/WASHINGTON
Background: [link:www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,995099,00.html|A Web of Intrigue]
ARTICLE
Posted Friday, Oct. 20, 2006
Did a Democratic member of Congress improperly enlist the support of a major pro-Israel lobbying group to try to win a top committee assignment? That's the question at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors, who are examining whether Rep. Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, according to knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.
The sources tell TIME that the investigation by Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has simmered out of sight since about the middle of last year, is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman's behalf. Harman said Thursday in a voicemail message that any investigation of — or allegation of improper conduct by — her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous." On Friday, Washington GOP super lawyer Ted Olson left voicemail messages underscoring that Harman has no knowledge of any investigation. "Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you've had," Olson said. "She is not aware of any such investigation, does not believe that it is occurring, and wanted to make sure that you and your editors knew that as far as she knows, that's not true... . No one from the Justice Department has contacted her." It is not, however, a given that Harman would know that she is under investigation. In a follow-up phone call from California, Olson said Harman hired him this morning because she takes seriously the possibility of a media report about an investigation of her, even though she does not believe it herself.
(snip)
The case is a spin-off of a probe that has already led to charges under the Espionage Act against two AIPAC lobbyists, whose case is still pending, and to a 12-and-a-half-year prison sentence for former Defense Intelligence Agency official Lawrence A. Franklin. Franklin pleaded guilty a year ago to three felony counts involving improper disclosure and handling of classified information about the Middle East and terrorism to the two lobbyists, who in turn are accused of passing it on to a journalist and a foreign government, widely believed to be Israel. The two lobbyists, who have denied any wrongdoing but were dismissed by AIPAC in April of 2005, were indicted on felony counts of conspiring with government officials to receive classified information they were not authorized to have access to and providing national defense information to people not entitled to receive it.
(snip)
The sources say 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. If that happened, it might be construed as an illegal quid pro quo, depending on the context of the situation. But the sources caution that there has been no decision to charge anyone and that it is unclear whether Harman and AIPAC acted on the idea.
(snip)
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069-3,00.html
Jane Harman was lobbying AIPAC, instead of the other way around, to keep her seat? All these neocon puppets need to tossed out ASAP!
September 15, 2006
The Hoekstra-Harman Hoax
How the War Party plans to lie us into war – again
by Justin Raimondo
For the War Party, deception isn't just a tactic, or even a strategy – it's a lifestyle. That's why they're indifferent to getting caught. Like a hardened criminal arrested for his umpteenth felony, the neocons see brazen lying as just a routine procedure. Caught red-handed, they just move on to their next subterfuge, one invariably designed to drag us into war.
That is the only way to explain what Reps. Peter Hoekstra and Jane Harman thought they were doing when they released their "report" [link:intelligence.house.gov/Media/PDFS/IranReport082206v2.pdf|Recognizing Iran as a Strategic Threat: An Intelligence Challenge for the United States] (.pdf) on Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, which – as the International Atomic Energy Agency puts it – is chock full of "erroneous, misleading, and unsubstantiated information." In a [link:www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/document091406.pdf|letter] (.pdf) to House Intelligence Committee chairman Hoekstra, IAEA official Vilmos Cserveny takes "strong exception" to "incorrect and misleading" claims in the report that the IAEA fired an inspector, one Christopher Charlier, for giving the Iranians a hard time. He was let go, says the Hoekstra-Harman report, because he went up against an alleged policy "barring IAEA officials from telling the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program," as Hoekstra-Harman put it. This conspiracy theory is put to rest by Cserveny, who curtly informs the American Congress that Iran is fully within its rights, under the Nonproliferation Treaty, to ask for the replacement of one inspector out of over 200 which it has accepted.
Cserveny points out, as did some in the blogosphere when the report first came out, that the "weapons grade" enrichment described by Hoekstra-Harman as occurring at Natanz is a complete fabrication. Why, it was only last April, Cserveny reminds the esteemed members of the House, that the inspectors verified a 3.6 percent enrichment rate – not the 90 percent or more required to qualify as "weapons grade."
(snip)
The War Party has learned nothing and has no regrets, and this willful blindness is underscored by the latter half of the Hoekstra-Harman duo. Even as the Democrats rail against the "quagmire" in Iraq, and decry the conduct of that war, their leaders are intent on dragging us into yet another conflict, this time much bigger, and with far more mire.
Harman has referred to Israel's murderous assault on Lebanon as "draining the swamp," and her position on Iran isn't much better: Her [link:www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=32408|solution to the Iranian problem] is to "recruit a much more diverse group of spies with cultural sensitivity" – rather than rely on the IAEA. I see she's learned a thing or two since her "debate" with Richard Perle at AIPAC's 2005 shindig, when she fell over herself agreeing with the Dark Prince of the War Party, as [link:www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/23/AR2005052301565_pf.html|chronicled] by Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank:
[ul]"Perle drew cheers for denouncing Palestinian anti-Semitism and the French. Harman mentioned that an aide once worked for AIPAC, called her audience 'very sophisticated' and celebrated Yasser Arafat's death as 'a blessing.' Debating a hard-liner in front of a pro-administration crowd, Harman heaped praise on President Bush, calling the Iraqi elections 'sensationally impressive' and moving to 'applaud' or 'commend' Perle and the administration a dozen times. 'Richard is right, and so is President Bush,' she said at one point.
"But after half an hour of this, Harman could not keep up. Perle provoked cheers from the crowd when he favored a military raid on Iran, saying that 'if Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon, I think we will have no choice but to take decisive action.' When Harman said the 'best short-term option' is the UN Security Council, the crowd reacted with boos."
Harman and her Democratic colleagues have no dispute with the Republicans – and the far-right neocons epitomized by Perle – when it comes to Iran. Both are determined to protect Israeli interests, at the expense of American interests, by threatening to go to war if Iran continues to pursue its apparent goal of joining the nuclear club, along with its neighbors, Israel and Pakistan. Everybody knows that what John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt call "the Lobby" is behind the current campaign to gin up another Middle Eastern war, this time with Iran. Israel's recent incursion into Lebanon was but a dress rehearsal for the main event – which is coming no matter how badly the Lebanese adventure turns out.
(snip)
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9702