Jane’s Harman Us
by
Becky Akers
by Becky Akers
Few sights
are as delicious as a tyrant swinging high overhead, hoist by her
own petard. The one currently dangling aloft is Rep. Jane Harman
(D-CA). She’s
worth half a billion dollars, making her the wealthiest thief
in the den of ’em we call Congress, with a mansion that can host
"over 120"
guests for dinner.
Her riches
haven’t kept her from leeching off taxpayers near Los Angeles for
seven terms, though they may explain why she pegs
herself as "the best Republican in the Democratic Party."
So good a Republican, in fact, that she rabidly defended the Bush
Administration’s domestic spying. Indeed, when the New York Times
first revealed a few years ago that the regime was reading our
emails and eavesdropping on our phone calls, Jane
indignantly suggested that we need "some limits on press
immunity [to prosecution]." Milady apparently forgot that she
uses the phone, too – though instead of dialing the liquor store
for another case of Dom Pérignon or her broker for more stock, she
peddles her influence to lobbyists. And the wiretapping she championed
against us peons caught her red-handed. So, Jane, how’s the air
up there?
When taped
a few years ago, our gal was talking to someone at the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC has long controlled a great
many American politicians; its website
quotes the New York Times’ assessment of it as "the most
important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel."
In fact, AIPAC so emphasizes "Israel" at the expense of
"American" that the
Kennedy Administration, among others,
insisted it register as an agent of a foreign government.
Jane’s conversation
with this foreign agent concerned two of its officers whom the Feds
accuse of espionage. Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman will finally
stand trial this June; the FBI alleges that they forwarded classified
information from a source at the Pentagon to the Israeli government.
Israel’s spying
on its staunchest ally and biggest benefactor is nothing new. But
it’s wasted effort: Our Rulers tie themselves and us in knots proving
their passion for that socialist
sand-dune. For starters, both Israel and the Feds consider us
taxpayers a cash cow for Israelis. Since 1949, Our Rulers have milked
us of at least $108 billion on Israel’s behalf, according to the
Washington
Report on Middle East Affairs’ painstaking and conservative
analysis. And that’s to say nothing of the wars we fight against
Israel’s enemies, nor the billions we spend policing her neighbors.
Were we curmudgeons,
we might condemn Israel’s spying as the height of ingratitude. But
what else should we expect? Israel’s learned that no matter how
it abuses Our Rulers, they’ll continue robbing us so communists
on kibbutzes can grow watermelons in the desert.
AIPAC wanted
Jane to talk the Department of Justice (DOJ) into reducing the charges
against Rosen and Weissman. In return, AIPAC would pressure House
Speaker Nancy
Pelosi to re-appoint Jane as chair of the Intelligence Committee.
Stunning, isn’t it, how casually AIPAC wields its immense power
as it moves politicians into position like chess pieces. Nor is
this an isolated incident: in 1992, AIPAC’s president bragged
about "negotiating" with Bill Clinton regarding his
appointments for Secretary of State, the Supreme Court, and the
National Security Agency.
On the other
hand, Israel and AIPAC’s meddling gives us a taste of the medicine
American politicians dispense worldwide. Has any nation on earth
escaped similar skullduggery and interference from Our Masters?
Jane warned
AIPAC that persuading the DOJ could be dicey. Congressional
Quarterly reports that she thought "influencing [then-Attorney
General Alberto] Gonzales would be a difficult task, because he
‘just follows White House orders,’ but that she might be able to
influence lesser officials, according to an official who read the
transcript." Here’s confirmation, as if we needed it, that
Gonzo was Bush’s creature.
Said creature
may have seemed a slow and lumpy nincompoop, but he played the game.
With the FBI aquiver over Jane’s corruption and the media publishing
surprisingly accurate rumors that both she
and AIPAC
vehemently denied, Gonzo leaped in. He ordered the FBI to drop its
investigation. Naturally, Jane claimed the G-men did so for "lack
of evidence." CQ tells us the real story: "according
to three top former national security officials, Gonzales wanted
Harman to be able to help defend the administration's warrantless
wiretapping program, which was about break in The New York Times
and engulf the White House."
Did Gonzo blackmail
Jane into cheerleading for Bush’s evisceration of the Fourth Amendment?
Or did the two simply work out yet another deal: her support in
return for his reducing the charges against AIPAC’s spooks? No wonder
Leviathan lusts to wiretap – not for sake of that all-purpose and
pathetic excuse, national security, but because ferreting out victims’
secrets brings politicians to heel as effectively as it does us
serfs.
In the end,
Jane didn’t get her chairmanship. We’ll see this summer whether
she swayed DOJ’s "lesser officials" to lessen charges.
And the rumors died – only to revive earlier this week when CQ
reported that not only were they true, but transcripts of Jane’s
recorded calls substantiate them.
That’s had
Jane defending herself instead of wiretapping. She
once again resorted to the politician’s perennially favorite ploy:
lying. "These claims are an outrageous and recycled canard,
and have no basis in fact. I never engaged in any such activity."
Alas, her own words refute this. So she
copped the criminal’s usual plea: "I, frankly, think my
name is clear … My conscience is certainly clear." Who knew
she had one?
Next in Jane’s
arsenal: logic – always sketchy territory for a congresscritter.
Why in the heck would she play footsie with AIPAC? She
doesn’t "need to persuade members of the American-Israeli
Political Action Committee [sic] that I am a friend of theirs."
No, she certainly doesn’t. Nor American taxpayers, either. "I never
had any idea that my government was wiretapping me at all," she
whined. Yeah, well, join the club.
Lo and behold,
Jane’s had an epiphany. She
now "think[s] the question is about ... did our government
abuse the rights of American citizens, including members of Congress,
with legal or illegal wiretappings…" It seems that compromising
yourself on tape focuses the mind about as wonderfully as hanging
does. And catch Jane’s conflating "members of Congress"
with "American citizens." What a wit!
Just as any
other citizen would, Jane’s
written to the US Attorney General regarding her plight. Unlike
any other citizen’s plea, though, hers will not only find its way
to Eric Holder’s desk, he’ll even respond to it – and promptly,
no doubt. Jane wants him to know that she frets over "this
abuse of power" from the DOJ’s agencies. How "outrageous"
that they would wiretap legislators! Though tardy, Jane’s concern
for the separation of powers might be commendable – were we still
functioning under the Constitution. But she and her colleagues ditched
that document long, long ago. So let no worry over its archaic concepts
spoil your fun as you watch these titans and tyrants duke it out.
The fray already
has Jane gabbling the truth for a change: "Many members of Congress
talk to advocacy groups [like AIPAC]," she
says. "My phone is ringing off the hook from worried members
who think [being wiretapped and caught] could have happened to them."
Indeed, CNN reports that Jane calls her corruption "entirely
appropriate."
Absolutely.
I’d go even further: it’s "entirely government."
April
27, 2009
Becky
Akers [send her mail]
writes primarily about the American Revolution.
Copyright
© 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in
part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Becky
Akers Archives
|