http://www.atlargely.com/2009/04/hastert-informed-of-harman-investigation.htmlApril 20, 2009
Hastert informed of Harman investigation?
Oh my, here is something new from Laura Rozen about the Jane Harman revelations:
A former intelligence official familiar with the matter told Foreign Policy on condition of anonymity Monday that Goss had been asked due to the unavailability of FBI director Robert Mueller to certify a FISA warrant that was seemingly triggered by a captured communication between Harman and someone who was already being surveilled by the U.S. intelligence community (presumably, the suspected "Israeli agent"). Furthermore, the former intelligence official said, longstanding protocol involving the separation of powers required that when intelligence exists that includes a member of Congress, that the heads of the body in which that member sits, in this case, the top Republican and Democratic in the House of Representatives, then House speaker Denny Hastert (R-IL) and minority leader Nancy Pelosi, (D-CA) be informed.
So former House speaker Denny Hastert was informed of the investigation into Harman? I find this amazing really. This man has allegedly sold classified information to the American Turkish Council and allegedly taken briefcases full of cash for votes. This man was allegedly caught by FBI surveillance monitoring Turkish nationals of dubious reputation in the middle of a cash bribe and he is notified of Harman's indiscretion? Why is no one making the point here regarding Hastert? Not Rozen, not anyone. Does no one find this a bit perverse?
Think about this. The third person in the chain of command, after the president and vice president, was allegedly selling classified information to ATC using third party thugs as middle-men (read Turkish mafia). He was allegedly being bribed for votes on foreign policy issues involving Turkey and Armenia. The then Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales instead of investigating Hastert, informs him that a Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee made what appears to be a deal or at the very least, had an improper communication with a foreign lobbyist.
The then-AG does not investigate this either, rather, uses it for political blackmail. So if Gonzales was not going to investigate Harman, why did he inform Hastert? And why is Hastert no longer being investigated? Because he was up until Bush came into office and John Ashcroft became the first DOJ patsy, before Gonzales, of that 8-year long absence of justice. Was Hastert cleared? If so, by whom and on what charges? I have never been able to confirm that he was cleared. I was able to confirm that there was an investigation through the Chicago office of the FBI, but not that Hastert was cleared.
Whatever Harman agreed to, and at the very least, she did have an inappropriate conversation, if Stein's article is accurate - and I believe it is, she did not engage in the kind of alleged crimes that Hastert was said to have engaged in. So why is no one discussing the issue of Hastert and what we now know of him being informed of Harman's alleged conversation? Does no one think this is important? Or is it that since Hastert is no longer in Congress, it does not matter? Since when have crimes stopped being crimes just because the person allegedly committing the crimes resigns?
Finally, in reference to Porter Goss and his version of reality, I do not now, nor did I during his tenture as DCI find him an honest broker. Why? Because he is an Agency man first and always. What I mean by this is that he was never a loyal American risking his life to make sure America was safe. No, he was never that. There are those in the Agency who are very much a person willing to die for their country. Goss and his gang were never that type of person. He was willing to risk a good deal for the CIA as a territory onto itself and certain business interests aligned with certain Agency interests.
If you watched the film The Good Shepherd, starring Matt Damon, Robert De Niro and other all-stars, you will recall a line at the end of the film:
I remember a senator once asked me. When we talk about "CIA" why we never use the word "the" in front of it. And I asked him, do you put the word "the" in front of "God"?"
The adviser for the film is former major spook Milton Beardon and he told me a few years back that he is the one who wrote that line for the film.
You see, the statement perfectly captures the old-boys club that certain Agency employees seem to value more than their nation and the lives they are tasked with protecting. I believe strongly that Porter Goss is this verity of spook rather than someone like Beardon whom I greatly respect or Bob Bear, also someone I greatly respect. There are others too whose names I cannot list, but whose service to this country is imesurable and to whom we owe a great deal of grattitude. But Goss is not one of these people in my opinion.
The major issue for me with regard to Goss is his friendship with right-wing Cuban terrorists. This is a problem for me and should be for anyone who considers terrorism not from a political perspective, but from the reality of what terrorism is and who funds it.
Think about this, how often does someone who is not a criminal have a dinner party with people who are? I don't mean any criminals either. I mean the likes of Watergate burglars (after the photo below was taken obviously), well known assassins, and drug runners. Take a look at the below photo and tell me who you recognize at this table:
PHOTO AT LINK
So Goss' version of reality has little credibility for me and should not be something to consider when trying to unravel Bush era-Agency criminal activity. If anything, Goss was likely cleaning up, not stepping in because the FBI Director was not around.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
