Happy October! (Surprised Yet?)

My goodness - yesterday the Republican Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee suspended a Dem staffer for having requested a look at the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq a few days before it was leaked.  Of course, the report had been widely circulated and the Times claimed many sources, but that doesn't mean this staffer (Larry Hanauer) was *not* a source.  Accusation first, evidence (if any) to follow.

As a second surprise, a book is now out claiming that a once-secret Soviet memo from 1983 documented an attempt by Sen. Ted Kennedy to enlist the head if the USSR in an anti-Reagan public relations effort.  Whoa!  Who are these people that claim to be our leaders and hope to regain the Senate majority?  (Well, at least no one drowned when that memo was written...)

And TIME is reporting more comedy from the "Democratic House Intelligence" side - the ranking Dem, Jane Harman, may be under investigation for engaging in politics.  No, seriously:

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.

The criminal is always the last to know!  The investigation centers around Harman's effort to save her seniority and derail the appointment of Alcee Hastings as Chairman as part of a Nancy Pelosi deal:

Around mid-2005, the [AIPAC-Larry Franklin] investigation expanded to cover aspects of Harman's quiet but aggressive campaign to persuade House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to reappoint her to the prestigious position on the House intel panel. The alleged campaign to support Harman for the leadership post came amid media reports that Pelosi had soured on her California colleague and might name Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida, himself a major supporter of Israel, to succeed Harman.

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.

Unless a lot more comes out, I have no doubt that on Nov 8 I will deplore this leak of an ongoing non-investigation.  But right now, this is not scoring that high on my Wilson-Fitzgerald Meter.

Comments

[Davis]

At the end of the day, voters will support the party they trust. It becomes increasingly clear that Democrats will sell out their country for political power.

[Patton]

I think this only becomes serious if we find out Harmon was e-mailing Jews, and those Jews didn't feel comfortable with the content of the e-mail.

[clarice]

As you know if you've read last night's threads--those are my thoughts exactly.
I can understand the level of logic is sufficient to meet the Nation's standards, but that it is now sufficient for Time and the UPI leads me to believe there's a lot of money to be made in a How to Write your Own News book.
(I blogged pretty much the same thing last night. If it gets online, I'll post the cite.)

[jerry]

I'd rather be talking about Abrahmof, Delay, Ney, Norquist, Reed, James Baker's noble task, Susan Ralston, Bolton's spying, Cunningham, the neglectful and obstructive Pat Roberts, Foley, all the really horrendous things etc... and Libby, Rove, and Fitz of course.

[Semanticleo]

"I'd rather be talking about Abrahmof, Delay"

How about Pat Tillman's birthday? Dig it.

http://www.truthdig.com/

[Marcel]

The TV news is full of images of Pres. Bush meeting with top generals. Why is this news?

[Semanticleo]

Forgot the hattip to Nitpicker for the headsup
on Tillman

[clarice]

Speaking of writing your own news-the WaPo is apparently swamped by readers who like myself belive the paper went over the cliff fo the DNC this election period.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001535.html

[Geek, Esq.]

Let's see, Republican hack Hoekstra suspends Democratic staffer without any evidence and turns it into a news story, and some wingnut alleges that Ted Kennedy is a traitor.

Zzzzzzzzzz. Republican bloggers can froth at the mouth over these non-stories, but the rest of the planet won't notice.

Regarding Harman and AIPAC, wouldn't surprise me. This is Washington, after all. And AIPAC is ethically-challenged, to say the least.

[Sue]

Democratic staffer without any evidence

And you have the link to the democratic staffer's denial of leaking?

[Davis]

The Dems have been out of the White House for 6 years and haven't controlled Congress for 12 years. But it has taken this long for people to stop being afraid to call out the Democrats for what they are - political opportunists who put their party above national security interests.

[Geek, Esq.]

"I have no credible information to say any classified information was leaked from the committee's minority staff. . . . This may in fact be only coincidence and simply 'look bad,' " LaHood said in his letter, but he requested a formal inquiry.

He even admitted that this action was politically motivated:

"We are in the political season. . . . If the ranking member wants to play politics," LaHood told Fox News yesterday, referring to Harman, "there are some of us on the other side that can play politics, and I'm not afraid to do it."

Cheap stunts like this serve as fodder for the wingnutosphere, but nothing more.

I certainly hope Messrs. Hoekstra and LaHood enjoy life in the minority next term, living under these kinds of ground rules. Payback is a b!tch.

[windansea]

well Geek...we know Teddy is a coward and leaves his dates in submerged cars, so traitor is not a big stretch

[Marcel]

Sue, the aide doesn't need to prove his innocence; the committee chair needs to provide evidence of his guilt. The aide is not an enemy combatant, in which case he would indeed be assumed guilty.

[Dawnsblood]

We shall see Idiot, Esq.

[clarice]

If you read the story Geek-you'd see that the Nation (creator of the Plame froth) rests on "sources inside and outside the government" which as I view their credibility is probably the VIPs and a charlady in the Dept of HHS.
The substance is that a big Dem contributor who also contributes to AIPAC pressed Pelosi to do something sensible if the Dems win the House--appoint Harman chairman of the intel committee. Now, I realize the Nation has had a recent success in getting normal political activity criminalized, but twice in a row to pull off such a stunt seems unlikely.

[Cecil Turner]

This may in fact be only coincidence and simply 'look bad,' " LaHood said in his letter, but he requested a formal inquiry.

Cute quote from MSNBC. Borderline deceptive:

"This may, in fact, be only coincidence, and simply 'look bad.' But coincidence, in this town, is rare."

And the idea that the electorate is going to care more about the politics involved in the suspension than the politics involved in the leak is, well, hopeful.

I certainly hope Messrs. Hoekstra and LaHood enjoy life in the minority next term, living under these kinds of ground rules.

Geek, them's eggs, not chickens.

Payback is a b!tch.

It's more than a little funny to hear Dems complain about "payback" after their obvious national security leak manipulation of the last couple years. Those are chickens, coming home to roost. It also appears to be a pattern, of which the little gay outing scheme is part, and I suspect they won't like how that works out either.

[Davis]

Geek may be correct that few people will pay attention. What is needed are indictments, public trials and convictions. There isn't enough time before the election, but lots of time before '08. Why is it that Justice is only charging Republicans? And why are there pre-election leaks from Justice about other investigations? Even Democratic Rep. Jefferson has not yet been charged with anything.

[adam sullivan]

Alcee Hastings was impeached as a Judge.

http://classes.lls.edu/archive/manheimk/fedcts/hastings1.html

Democrats: A Culture Of Double Standards

[Semanticleo]

"Why is it that Justice is only charging Republicans?"

Wait until they can no longer tyrannize House rules.

[Sue]

the aide doesn't need to prove his innocence

In the court of public opinion, it would go a long way. I find it interesting that he has hired a lawyer and even the lawyer has not denied the allegations. We'll see.

[Marcel]

The lawyer doen't need to make statements to the Press. This isn't a TV program like Justice or Shark where lawyers try to manipulate the Press. This is about someone's career. Congress is already held in low regard. Why would anyone want to work there?

[Cecil Turner]

even the lawyer has not denied the allegations.

Noticed that too, eh?

[Turley] said there was "not a single scintilla of evidence suggesting that Mr. Hanauer had any role in the leaking of the NIE," or National Intelligence Estimate, and that he was drafting a sworn statement to that effect.

Kinda sounds like Richard Gere in Chicago.

[Jane]

Why would anyone want to work there?

Assume you can get as rich as Harry Reid...

[Sue]

The lawyer doen't need to make statements to the Press.

Of course he doesn't. But, once again, in the court of public opinion, they do it all the time.

[clarice]

My take:
http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5966

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

'...some wingnut alleges that Ted Kennedy is a traitor.'

Please, the Soviet archives document it.

Similarly, Anatoly Dobrynin's letters to Moscow in 1980 document that Jimmy Carter sent Armand Hammer to the Soviet embassy to ask for assistance in his election with Reagan. Dobrynin quotes Hammer saying Carter 'wouldn't forget it' if they did things like relax Jewish emmigration quotas, and he was re-elected.

Carter himself went to the Soviet embassy in 1983 to encourage Dobrynin not to cooperate with Reagan. Saying he should hold out until after the 1984 election, and maybe he'd have a Democrat President to work with.

Treason is something of a tradition for the Democrats.

[eric]

Yikes! The word of the day is: shrill.

I'm gonna have to agree with Clarice, though, that this Harman thing really seems like a non-story (Nation-pushed or not). Maybe there's a bit of that old fallacy that if you say something bad about one side it makes the other side look good, but I think the political climate these days is so polarized that there are effectively two echo-chamber vacuums going on (does sound echo in a vacuum? Maybe not).

@Cecil Turner: "And the idea that the electorate is going to care more about the politics involved in the suspension than the politics involved in the leak is, well, hopeful."

For sure. Plus, I have no doubt that even if the power structure was different that someone would have leaked anyway.

[windansea]

JUBILANT DEMOCRATS SHOULD RECONSIDER their order for confetti and noisemakers. The Democrats, as widely reported, are expecting GOP-weary voters to flock to the polls in two weeks and hand them control of the House for the first time in 12 years -- and perhaps the Senate, as well. Even some Republicans privately confess that they are anticipating the election-day equivalent of Little Big Horn. Pardon our hubris, but we just don't see it.

Our analysis -- based on a race-by-race examination of campaign-finance data -- suggests that the GOP will hang on to both chambers, at least nominally. We expect the Republican majority in the House to fall by eight seats, to 224 of the chamber's 435. At the very worst, our analysis suggests, the party's loss could be as large as 14 seats, leaving a one-seat majority. But that is still a far cry from the 20-seat loss some are predicting. In the Senate, with 100 seats, we see the GOP winding up with 52, down three

Is our method reliable? It certainly has been in the past. Using it in the 2002 and 2004 congressional races, we bucked conventional wisdom and correctly predicted GOP gains both years. Look at House races back to 1972 and you'll find the candidate with the most money has won about 93% of the time. And that's closer to 98% in more recent years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Polls can be far less reliable. Remember, they all but declared John Kerry president on Election Day 2004.

Barrons

[windansea]

oh yeah...a big gold star to the first lefty who whines that politics is all about money :)

[Specter]

Geek -

Notice that you said Hoekstra has no evidence and then quoted LaHood. Sorry - they are two different people. As far as I know, Hoekstra - who is the one who did the suspending - has not said anything to that effect. LaHood on the other hand leaked the info to the press. To me, that should not have been done. Let the investigation happen, and then tell us afterwards. Somehow, LaHood just stooped to the level of the Democrats.

[Specter]

I want to go back to Harman. In yesterday's thread several people noted the change in her behavior - from being fairly steady and not to obnoxious, to being more and more partisan and shrill. Do you suppose that it is the result of this investigation which apparently started last year? It almost seems like we are in a huge tit-for-tat game - Republicans investigate Harman, she leaks the Cunningham docs, they suspend her staffer....Sounds like sour grapes to me.

[windansea]

more bad news for lefties

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Oil on Friday fell more than 2 percent to a 2006 low below $57 a barrel on speculation that OPEC members would not follow through on plans to make deep production cuts to stem a three-month price slide.

[AllenS]

"JUBILANT DEMOCRATS SHOULD RECONSIDER their order for confetti and noisemakers"--Good point. I suggest they order clown noses and shoes.

[SlimGuy]

Specter

My take is like Clarice's on the time airpac story..sounds like a non starter until something else develops

The change is palatable in her behavior from mild mannered to shrill almost, totally out of character for a moderate dem.

Links suggest that Pelosi/Waters may be twisting her arm because of not being Dem enough ala Joe Liberman

[clarice]

Well, you answered specter for me SG..I think her change is reflective of internicine party fighting...and marginalizing moderates on defense. (And boy does this story highlight it.)

[Specter]

Ahhh....But Joe is an Independent and wiping up on the favored Dem after his own party threw him under the bus. LOL.

But you may be correct that the crazy-lefters are trying to twist Harman's arm. What does it mean to be a middle-of-the-road Democrat nowadays? It's obvious that there is an implied threat that you either play strictly by their rules or you get tossed under the bus. Too bad because they are getting rid of the strength of the party.

[SlimGuy]

Newsbusters is reporting a second referal to the FBI from CREW about some emails on the Weldon team.

The whole thing sounds like a non story but seems like a one/two timed punch.

http://newsbusters.org/node/8495

[Sue]

Somehow, LaHood just stooped to the level of the Democrats.

It would have been leaked anyway, whether it was done by LaHood or not. I still don't understand why, if he did not have anything to do with the leak, he or his lawyer, or even Jane Harman, have not categorically denied he did it. That is usually the 1st thing an accused does, whether they did it or not. All we are hearing is no evidence. Lack of evidence is not necessarily a sign of innocense. Something the democrats use to full advantage.

[clarice]

LaHood may have been acting on mere suspicion. I do not think Hoekstra was--and then there's that curious reference he made to the leakers as "they".

[SlimGuy]

Specter

My take on Lamont is that he is the darling of the web nutroots but there is a split decision by the Dems but they are having to accept him since they are using him as a Not Joe candidate. The dems endorsement is not a ringing one and also not unified. Plus he has received little financial support from the party and a good portion of his campaign is self financed.

[clarice]

Maybe it's a new Dem income redistribution scheme--Get rich ninnies to run on their own dime.

[Specter]

That is true Sue. But not actually what I was trying to get at. As much as I love seeing the Republicans finally hitting back, I don't want to be like the Democrats who run to the microphones at the slightest indication of scandal. I don't think that is where we want to be.

As far as Hanauer's leak - I think he hasn't denied it because he knows they have the goods.

[Specter]

SG,

Lamont did not run simply as "Not Joe" but more as "Not Bush". His biggest downfall is that he is still running ads aimed at the Democratic base, and not Republican and Indy's who will be the deciding vote.

[SlimGuy]

Specter

True, the dems see him in a way a not bush , but were surprised some when Joe went (I).

Now they are stuck with Lamont and so far their reaction and support have been a mixed bag.

[SlimGuy]

Just a sidelight on FL16 (the Foley district)

One card Negron has going for him that neither Foley or the Dem have is Negron is of Cuban decent and 10% of the districts population is hispanic.

[Cecil Turner]

Pardon our hubris, but we just don't see it.

Nor do I. The "generic race" poll numbers are a waste of time, and the other polls typically show Dems up by at least a couple more points than they actually get on election day (turnout?). Factoring that into the race-by-race data, the Senate seems safe (with a couple seat loss likely) and the House is gonna be really, really close.

I don't want to be like the Democrats who run to the microphones at the slightest indication of scandal.

Nor do I, but stemming these leaks is well worth doing, and a simple "cui bono?" pretty much proves it's a Dem. (And access is an administration function, not a legal one, so stripping it does not require a conviction.) That said, the really harmful leaks were the NSA ones, and I'd like to see both the perpetrators in jail, and the public informed as to which party (duh) was behind 'em.

[topsecretk9]

FWIW...John Boehner said:

...Chairman Hoekstra did the right thing by suspending this Democrat staff member's access to classified information pending a full review of this illegal leak. The fact is there may have been others who had access to this sensitive information, but only one staffer requested it by name the same week it was illegally leaked to the press. And that was the Democrat staff member Hoekstra suspended...

"Access to"...and sounds like only the Congresscritters not staffers.

Link

[Rick Ballard]

Specter,

I agree with your take on LaHood. Republicans won't win a mud wrestling contest in the Mediacrat pigpen. Ask ex-Speaker Gingrich or never-Speaker Livingston.

You're take on Lamont is also correct. The nutroot understanding of politics is a joy to watch in action. Ignorance backed by stupidity doesn't win many elections.

[topsecretk9]

--I want to go back to Harman. In yesterday's thread several people noted the change in her behavior - from being fairly steady and not to obnoxious, to being more and more partisan and shrill. Do you suppose that it is the result of this investigation which apparently started last year?---

Can't put my finger on it, but that whole Time story sounded straight from the left's playbook. IIRC no quotes from FBI or DOJ...all the AIPPAC and other info seemed to come straight from the person bugged by it(Pelosi). I don't think Democrats(Pelosi) like Jane Harmen and would like to set the stage for her replacement of Hastings to the Committee chair.