The Wash Post had a doozy of a front page article today on the Jane Harman/AIPAC scandal. The piece, “US Might Not Try Pro-Israel Lobbyists” with a subtitle “Meanwhile, Rep. Harman Denies offering to Influence Case” brilliantly avoided saying anything nasty about Israel. You mean they spy on us and try to buy and otherwise influence our legislators? Shocking, shocking!
The feature para on Harman must be quoted in full “Transcripts of the FBI wiretaps depict a possible trade of favors in which Harman expressed willingness to discuss the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee prosecution with senior administration officals and, in return, AIPAC backers would provide Democrats with additional campaign contributions and support Harman’s efforts to become chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence…”
Actually, other media reporting on the case indicates that Harman was speaking to an Israeli intelligence officer or someone acting on the Israeli’s behalf. She allegedly promised to do what she could to stop the AIPAC trial in exchange for Israel government and lobby support to obtain the plum committee assignment. Some would call that unseemly or worse. Much worse. Think about the possible consequences of a chairman of the intelligence committee who was beholden to a foreign government for his or her position, for example.
The Post completely hides the Israeli hand in its description of Harman’s actions, though it later has a particularly convoluted bit of prose, “Harman came to the attention of the FBI when she was heard conversing with someone whom the FBI was wiretapping under a law permitting domestic surveillance of suspected foreign intelligence agents…” So a foreign government was involved…just which one might it be? The Post never says. It then goes on to avoid reporting that the investigation of Harman was allegedly squashed by Bush Attorney General Gonzales in exchange for Harman’s support of the NSA illegal wiretap program.
The rest of the article tells how AIPAC spies Weissman and Rosen will likely walk when their trial re-commences in June. In its article, the Post described AIPAC as “an influence advocacy group.”