Congresswoman Harman has never contacted the Justice Department about its prosecution of present or former AIPAC employees and the Department has never informed her that she was or is the subject of or involved in an investigation.Note that she has not denied being approached by Haim Saban -- or some other party -- with a quid pro quo. If Harman is being truthful when she says that she was not informed of an investigation -- and I think that she is telling the truth -- then we should question the sources who told this tale to Jeff Stein.
I'll ask again: Why not go after Haim Saban (if he was the party in question) for acting as an agent of a foreign nation without registration? The law stipulates that registration is mandatory. Has that law ever been applied to anyone acting on behalf of Israel? Can you think of a single prosecution?
3 comments:
It's clear to me someone powerful is out to end Harman's political career, and I suspect it's payback, and from the Democratic aisle. Maybe Pelosi wants and has a replacement for Harman. We'll see who wins this cat-fight.
Beyond Harman's complete denial of this story, there is some additional evidence that she was not "shilling for Bush," as she's now be accused. In a 2002 meeting of Congressional leader, she was the ONLY one who objected to the interrogation program, according to Porter Goss. She followed up with an official protest in the form of a letter to the CIA, which contents can't be revealed due to the secrecy rules she must follow as head of the intelligence committee.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/20/bush_era_cia_officials_push_back
Pelosi knew.
Everyone knew.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069,00.html
This article was supposed to embarrass Gonzales and the Bush admin. Harman is simply collateral damage.
Post a Comment