If you have "no place to go," come here!

See Jane turn shrill

vastleft's picture

High snark from Glenn on Jane Harman's sudden conversion from Serious advocate of extra-legal surveillance to civil-liberties Extremist. serious as it is when a member of Congress is the target of government eavesdropping, can we really afford to investigate this? After all, we have so many very important things to do. It really seems like we need to be looking forward, not backwards. The Bush administration is gone. This all happened in 2005 -- years ago. Is this really a time to be pursuing grudges, to be re-litigating old disputes? What kind of partisan witch hunt is Harman after? We can, and surely should, reflect on what happened to her -- in fact, let us now pause together for a moment of quiet reflection on what was done to Jane Harman -- but this is not a time for retribution or looking back. "Most Americans" want the people's business done, not "abuse of power" investigations.


No votes yet


lizpolaris's picture
Submitted by lizpolaris on

And let's hope this incident changes Harman's mind about the legality/legitimacy of wiretapping any and all citizens, now that her own ox is gored.

But I'm glad to see that someone (BTD) agrees with me on the anonymous leaks of comments about transcripts that were read.

Gee, I'm sure the people who gave this information to Stein were trying to be completely neutral and accurate about describing the content of what they had seen or heard. I'm confident they applied no bias at all as they spoke with him. And further, I'm sure they told him everything word for word as closely as they could remember it - not omitting any details that didn't support their purpose for giving him the information. /end snark

Harman is right to ask that the transcripts be provided, now that she's being smeared with them. What exactly do people want her to deny or defend? Who knows? At this point, it's just a bunch of secondhand heresay.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

Yes, yes. The motives.... When has a leak not been driven by ulterior motives? What matters is whether it is true or not true. At least that is what matters to me. I would like to see all the evidence as well, and when it comes out make the judgement for myself.

It might work out that the smoke causing the fire is the leakers motives, it might work out that it is iHarman's actions. Given what I'm reading (and since I trust you and BTD to read with intelligence, please extend the same courtesy), I'm leaning to the latter.