And the wire taps for Harmon were FISA approved, so forget about the Herbert Hoover arguments (not to mention Harmon supported reducing or eliminating FISA requirements, not strengthning.)

Yeah, we don’t know the background on the case presented to FISA. We don’t know how many cases or the merits of those cases involving democrats. We do know the Department of Justice and the NSA were abused, the Department of Justice in particular was used to carry out political prosecutions.

We don’t know whether the past admin was keeping dossiers on political targets, and that’s what Herbert used to do.

We don’t know, but we have reason to suspect, which is reason to investigate in a transparent and public way.

He just can’t get past his ethnic interests on this issue.

Remember, you are only seeing a small portion of what goes on – every time they are caught you can be sure 10 similar incidents go undetected.

And the wire taps for Harmon were FISA approved, so forget about the Herbert Hoover arguments (not to mention Harmon supported reducing or eliminating FISA requirements, not strengthning.)

Well, no. For one thing, AIPAC is not poisoning political dissenters with uranium.

That you know of, Rojas. That you know of.

The Harman deal was with an Israeli operative. Not AIPAC. The operative wanted Harman’s help on AIPAC’s behalf. At which point, they were willing to lobby Pelosi for Harman’s promotion.

That AIPAC was doing intel work on Israel’s behalf is an important symptom of the real disease. There’s a chance that there’s too much covert Israeli tampering within the American government. On both sides of the aisle.

And then there’s the whole separate disease of the past administration abusing NSA powers.

A real Augean Stables has developed here.

My comparison was on tactics and desire to use them, which at this point is starting to look more and more similar.

Well, no. For one thing, AIPAC is not poisoning political dissenters with uranium.

(I know, I’m just stirring up the shit right now, but…) The NSA story and the influence AIPAC has on politicians on both side of the aisle are both extremely important issues. I for one really desire to know why the republicans felt free enough to invent scandal from whole cloth ie: Don Seigelman and ACORN, or use their powers in unusual and extreme ways to catch dems ie: Spitzer and William Jefferson, while the democrats have proved hesitant to investigate and prosecute the most outrageous violations of the law and constitution. Before I thought it was just craven weakness – cowardice + corruption and aggressive lobbying from interested parties. It very well still could be, but the possibility exists that the Bush Administration had info that they were willing to use if the dems started acting too far out of line ie: like republicans.

PS. I’m only saying the possibility exists. What’s needed are transparent investigations to confirm whether or not oppositional government has been crippled for the last 6 or so years because the Mayberry Machiavellis used every means at their disposal, legal or not, to break it.

But I might also point out that there are other aspects of Israeli spying that have their own set of problems. For instance, I’d indicate that Israel is a keystone for much of our Middle Eastern policy (which is, in itself, a keystone for much of our foreign policy), and one which they might not have our best interests at heart. So not only do you have a nation whose lead we might follow on, say, making war with Iran, but you also have them actively stealing United States intelligence (presumably, of the kind we don’t share with them already). Imagine if, for instance, instead of reducing the sentence of two AIPAC members accused of espionage, they were asking to suppress a report casting credible doubt on the advancement of Iran’s nuclear program, or to axe a deal with Hamas, or whatever. Sound far-fetched? I don’t know why it should. Russian intelligence had the capacity to screw us over in isolated theaters, but most of their operational intelligence (not counting, say, nuclear or major weapon secrets) could not be used to push America into making war on its enemies.

The lobbying thing is for the most part above-board. I don’t like it because I don’t necessarily like their agenda (at least not lately), but I can’t begrudge them wanting to see their agenda enacted—it’s what any lobbying group does.

But actively staffing with covert operatives? Asking members of the intelligence committee to step in on their behalf in protecting their espionage operation in exchange for political favors? And members of Congress actively taking them up on that?

Again, you don’t have to even particularly dislike Israel to see this as a massive problem. I think there are bigger fucked up things about this story than the AIPAC angle, which might rank 4th or 5th, but it’s certainly in the mix.

Look, what happened here is clearly unacceptable, and your concern is justified, but do I really need to point out the reasons why that particular comparison is hyperbolic?

Clearly what we don’t know right now is whether Harman and Rockefeller defended the surveillance state because they were slavishly devoted to liable telecoms or because Bushies were leaning on them with NSA leverage.
But yeah, this is J Edgar Hoover territory here.

Two corrections:

1. It is not clear from the story whether the wiretap on Harman was with a warrant or not. It was a FISA wiretap, but whether conducted through the old methods or via the Bushian revamped and supercharged process is unclear. That’s probably worth somebody figuring out: the executive surveilling members of the opposition party in Congress is, clearly, something that needs very, very clear line defined.

2. It is also not clear that the person lobbying Harman was a covert agent (CQ’s implication, which they make explicit in their story), or just a lobbyist. Jeffrey Goldberg, among others, suggests the latter, although I’m not convinced that distinction matters much in this specific instance.

Like I said, this is a story that’s going to take a lot of unpacking.

Harman I think is only the third most important actor here. The first two are, in order:

1. An executive branch spying on members of Congress (perhaps illegally, perhaps not) and then apparently deciding how to use (or not use) that information based purely and explicitly on political advantage. What. The. Fuck.

2. And secondly, AIPAC. I know it’s very radioactive to talk about any kind of Zionist conspiracy, but at this point I don’t think you have to be anti-Semitic to recognize that AIPAC is a little more than simply an effective lobbying organization. It appears to be a direct organ of the Israeli state and, particularly, its intelligence services, not only extracting a great deal of overt, political influence, but also as a launchpad for covert espionage. Although they are a friendly country, the extent to which they’re engaging in intelligence operations against us is alarming, and I’m not sure I want Benjamin Netanyahu with a direct line to state secrets and blackmail material on enormously influential members of Congress. It’s getting ridiculous with AIPAC, like the KGB setting up shop on K-Street and being so brazen as to hang a sign over their door.