National Security Leaker - UPDATE - Identified as Larry Hanauer, hired by Jane Harman, Democrat House Intel. Com. Minority Leader

Welcome Instapundit readers. Thanks for stopping by.

We are updating regularly, scroll for latest entries.

*******************

UPDATE: LEAKER NAMED AND HE WAS HIRED BY JANE HARMAN!

Explains why she went ballistic.

****** End update ******

Tigerhawk writes:

All along, I assumed that the leak to the New York Times of the summary findings of the National Intelligence Estimate was just another chapter in the permanent bureaucracy's continuing war against the Bush administration's foreign policy. After all, I assumed, why would a Democratic operative be so stupid as to work directly with the New York Times on such a story?

Glenn Reynolds says: "Patrick Fitzgerald, call your office."

MacRanger opines: "This is going to get good. “Democrat Spies on the House Intelligence Committee during a time of war."

And AJ Strata sums up:

This illustrates to what lengths the Democrats will go to try and get power. Their obsession with power has allowed them to rationalize breaking critical national security laws and tipping our hands to our enemies, all so they can cripple this President and win elections. This is much more serious than sick emails to a Page. This kind of activity that over the past year has tipped off our enemies on how to avoid detection, even making the leaked intel information fodder for terrorist handbooks. This can kill people by helping terrorists get past our defenses (the same defenses Dems want dismantled if they win control of Congress)

What are they all talking about? The LA Times has the story:

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee has suspended a Democratic staff member pending an investigation into whether he leaked a high-level intelligence assessment to the news media.

The committee’s top Democrat said the suspension was “without basis.

The staff member, who was not identified, was suspended this week by Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., his spokesman said Thursday evening. The aide is being denied access to classified information pending the outcome of a review, said the spokesman, Jamal Ware.

The leak to The New York Times of a National Intelligence Estimate on global terror trends caused a political uproar last month. In the assessment, completed in April, analysts from the government’s 16 spy agencies concluded that the Iraq war has become a “cause celebre” for Islamic extremists, breeding deep resentment of the U.S. that probably will get worse before it gets better.

President Bush suggested the document was leaked for “political purposes” weeks before the midterm elections. He later made public four pages of the estimate’s key findings.

In a letter to Hoekstra dated Sept. 29, Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Ill., a committee member, said the Democratic staffer requested the document from National Intelligence Director John Negroponte three days before a Sept. 23 story by the Times on its conclusions.

“I have no credible information to say any classified information was leaked from the committee’s minority staff, but the implications of such would be dramatic,” LaHood said in the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press. “This may, in fact, be only coincidence, and simply ‘look bad.’ But coincidence, in this town, is rare.”

Ware, Hoekstra’s spokesman, said: “Chairman Hoekstra considers security highly important, and the coincidence certainly merits a review.”

The Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat, Jane Harman of California, wrote to Hoekstra that she was “appalled” by his action, which was “without basis.”

“I demand that you immediately reinstate the staffer’s access to classified information,” she said”

Ed Morrissey concludes and I agree 100%:

If this turns out to be true, the staffer should face several years in prison. After all, the Congressional committees have to protect national-security information, and the American people have to trust them to do so. Politicians have often been careless with classified material, but this will be the first time in recent memory that anyone involved in the committees have been identified as a deliberate leaker. That cannot go without serious consequences, or else politicians and their staffers from both parties will manipulate exposure of secret information for political purposes at their whim.

UPDATE:

Fox News has identified the leaker as Larry Hanauer.

The unidentified staff member is Larry Hanauer, FOX News learned Friday. Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., suspended Hanauer earlier this week and won't allow him access to classified information until a review can be completed, said Jamal Ware, Hoekstra's spokesman.

Source Watch has the following about Larry Hanauer:

At the Department of Defense, Larry Hanauer worked at the "Israel/Syria/Lebanon desk ... Near East South Asia (NESA)" in the Pentagon's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, International Security Affairs."[1] (http://www.amconmag.com/12_1_03/feature.html)

Larry Hanauer graduated from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, in 1995. Amidst the events of September 11, 2001, Hanauer "fled the damaged headquarters building with fellow Fletcher graduates Jay Wilkins, F'88, and Mustafa Popal (F'01)."[2] (http://www.fletcherclubofdc.org/terrorismexperts.html)

---

"LARRY HANAUER, wrapped up a year of working on U.S. policy toward Iraq and is now managing U.S. defense relations with Israel from his teeny little Pentagon office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Larry was recently elected as a Term Member of the Council on Foreign Relations, asked to join the board of the American Jewish Committee's Washington Young Leadership Forum, and appointed to the Board of Advisors of Fletcher's Program on Southwest Asia and Islamic Civilization." Fall 2000 (http://rlt.freeservers.com/classnewssummer00.htm)[3] (http://www.namebase.org/xham/Larry-Hanauer.html)

---

Other Affiliations

• Policy Analyst, Africa Region Office within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Spring 1997[4] (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/20_15.pdf)
• Core Group Member, Term Roundtable on Iran and Generational Change: Longterm Strategic Alternatives for U.S. Policy, Council on Foreign Relations; Roundtable Established October 2002/Report April 2003[5]

MacRanger has more:

Seems that Mr. Hanauer might have a reason to resent the Bush Administration:

“Shortly after George W. Bush is inaugurated, “[k]ey personnel, long-time civilian professionals” at the Pentagon’s Near East South Asia (NESA) desk are moved or replaced with people from neoconservative think tanks. [American Conservative, 12/1/2003; Mother Jones, 1/2004 Sources: Karen Kwiatkowski] Joe McMillan, the Office Director, is moved to a new location outside of the Pentagon, which according to Karen Kwiatkowski, who works at the NESA desk, is odd because “the whole reason for the Office Director being a permanent civilian (occasionally military) professional is to help bring the new appointee up to speed, ensure office continuity, and act as a resource relating to regional histories and policies.” [American Conservative, 12/1/2003; Mother Jones, 1/2004; Salon, 3/10/2004 Sources: Karen Kwiatkowski] Larry Hanauer, who has long been at the Israel-Syria-Lebanon desk and who is known to be “even-handed with Israel,” is replaced by David Schenker of the Washington Institute. [American Conservative, 12/1/2003; Mother Jones, 1/2004 Sources: Karen Kwiatkowski] Other veteran NESA employees who are banished include James Russell, who has served as the country director for Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, and Marybeth McDevitt, the country director for Egypt. [Mother Jones, 1/2004]”

And this from one of Mac's comment entries:

April 25, 2004
WEDDINGS/CELEBRATIONS; Julie Breslow, Laurence Hanauer
…

Mr. Hanauer, 34, is a consultant on homeland security and intelligence issues at Booz Allen Hamilton, the consulting firm in McLean, Va. He graduated magna cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania and received a master’s degree in international relations from Tufts. From 1995 to 2003, Mr. Hanauer was a foreign policy adviser in the office of the Secretary of Defense, working primarily on Middle Eastern and European security issues.

Carol

Left by Carol Johnson on October 20th, 2006

Mr. Hanauer's wife appears to be a DC magistrate with a heavy background in children's issues:

Julie Rebecca Breslow graduated magna cum laude from Union College, and received her J.D. from Albany Law School. She joined the Office of the Corporation Counsel and was a trial attorney in the Child Support Enforcement, ; Juvenile Delinquency and Child Abuse and Neglect sections. In 1995, Ms. Breslow joined the staff of the court-appointed receiver for the Child and Family Services Agency (CFSA), training social workers on legal issues. She established the Court Services Unit at CFSA to assist social workers and the Court. In 1998, Ms. Breslow became the Victims' Rights Attorney for the Executive Office of United States Attorneys. She then joined the D.C. United States Attorney's Office as Chief of the Victim and Witness Assistance Unit. There Ms. Breslow established the office's Child Waiting Room, which provides child victims and the children of victims and witnesses with a safe and child-friendly place to play while they wait. Ms. Breslow was on the Board of Directors of the D.C. Rape Crisis Center from 1995-2000, and served as the President of the Board from 1998-1999.

Democratic House Intelligence - The New Oxymoron - The crack JOM forensics blogger team is on the story. Think of it this way. Squiggler has the links, JOM has the commentary.

AJ adds this bit of information about Hanauer:

Addendum: It seems Mr. Hanauer is not a fan of the Iraq conflict, at least from what we can tell from his own words at a Council of Foreign Relations event in 2005:

QUESTIONER: Larry Hanauer with Booz, Allen, Hamilton. There’s a lot of discussion about regime change, whether it’s something that we or some other outside force instigates, or whether regime change just comes about through ordinary demographic change over time. But I’m wondering if anyone has given thought to really what comes next. The regime change would change the whole political structure, as Ambassador Palmer has said; it would change the economic structure of the country [Iran]. And I think we’re seeing now in Iraq what happens when we pursue regime change without adequately thinking about the aftermath. So I’m wondering what might come next, and who in the U.S. government is thinking about it?

From this site of a young man working or visiting the Hill (search on Hanauer), I learned Larry Hanauer did a stint on the staff of NY Rep Joseph Crowley, giving Hanauer a NY connection and probably press contacts with the NY Times. Crowley’s official site is here. So that establishes a path to the NY news media.

Is this one reason why Hanauer became a disgruntled leaker?:

Larry Hanauer
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
Tufts-Fletcher-AlumniClubs-DC
[email protected]
Council on Foreign Relations. Membership Roster. 2004

As the momentum for war began to build in early 2002, Wolfowitz and Feith beefed up the intelligence unit and created an Iraq war-planning unit in the Pentagon's Near East and South Asia Affairs section, run by Deputy Undersecretary of Defense William Luti, under the rubric "Office of Special Plans," or OSP; the new unit's director was Abram N. Shulsky. By then, Wurmser had moved on to a post as senior adviser to Undersecretary of State John Bolton, yet another neocon, who was in charge of the State Department's disarmament, proliferation, and WMD office and was promoting the Iraq war strategy there. Shulsky's OSP, which incorporated the secret intelligence unit, took control, banishing veteran experts‚ -- including Joseph McMillan, James Russell, Larry Hanauer, and Marybeth McDevitt‚ -- who, despite years of service to NESA, either were shuffled off to other positions or retired. For the next year, Luti and Shulsky not only would oversee war plans but would act aggressively to shape the intelligence product received by the White House.

Fox reports that Hanauer has hired Constitutional lawyer, Jonathan Turley. (Update: with a sitting Grand Jury already investigating National Security leaks to the press, Mr. Hanauer  (and his boss, Jane Harman) may want to rethink this and get themselves a criminal attorney.) Turley's George Washington University bio. reads:

Jonathan  Turley
J.B. and Maurice Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law;
Director of the Environmental Law Advocacy Center;
Executive Director, Project for Older Prisoners

Education: B.A. University of Chicago; J.D., Northwestern University

Biographical Sketch: Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the GW Law faculty in 1990, and in 1998 became the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. He is the founder and executive director of the Project for Older Prisoners (POPS). He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, and other schools. He most recently completed a three-part study of the historical and constitutional evolution of the military system. Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades, including his representation of the Area 51 workers at a secret air base in Nevada; the nuclear couriers at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Rocky Flats grand jury in Colorado; Dr. Eric Foretich, the husband in the famous Elizabeth Morgan custody controversy; and four former U.S. attorneys general during the Clinton impeachment litigation. Professor Turley has also served as counsel in a variety of national security and terrorism cases, and has been ranked as one of the top ten lawyers handling military cases. He has served as a consultant on homeland security and constitutional issues, and is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort reform legislation. He is also a nationally recognized legal commentator; he ranked 38th in the top 100 most cited ‘public intellectuals’ in a recent study by Judge Richard Posner and was found to be the second most cited law professor in the country. He is a member of the USA Today board of contributors and the recipient of ‘2005 Single Issue Advocate of the Year’—the annual opinion award for the Aspen Institute and The Week magazine. His more than 400 articles on legal and policy issues have appeared

Current Semester Courses: Environmental Crimes Project, Environmental Law Clinic, Environmental Legislation Proj, Prisoners Project, Torts

Now here is a real scary thought. Hanauer has a connection to Karen Kwiatkowski. Karen Kwiatkowski is one of the signers to this document (can you say VIPs? Mary O. McCarthy?).

A Call to Patriotic Whistleblowing

September 9, 2004 . Washington, DC

It is time for unauthorized truth-telling.

Citizens cannot make informed choices if they do not have the facts–for example, the facts that have been wrongly concealed about the ongoing war in Iraq: the real reasons behind it, the prospective costs in blood and treasure, and the setback it has dealt to efforts to stem terrorism. Administration deception and cover-up on these vital matters has so far been all too successful in misleading the public. Also See:

TruthTellingProject.org Many Americans are too young to remember Vietnam. Then, as now, senior government officials did not tell the American people the truth. Now, as then, insiders who know better have kept their silence, as the country was misled into the most serious foreign policy disaster since Vietnam.

Some of you have documentation of wrongly concealed facts and analyses that–if brought to light–would impact heavily on public debate regarding crucial matters of national security, both foreign and domestic. We urge you to provide that information now, both to Congress and, through the media, to the public.

Thanks to our First Amendment, there is in America no broad Officials Secrets Act, nor even a statutory basis for the classification system. Only very rarely would it be appropriate to reveal information of the three types whose disclosure has been expressly criminalized by Congress: communications intelligence, nuclear data, and the identity of US intelligence operatives. However, this administration has stretched existing criminal laws to cover other disclosures in ways never contemplated by Congress.

There is a growing network of support for whistleblowers. In particular, for anyone who wishes to know the legal implications of disclosures they may be contemplating, the ACLU stands ready to provide pro bono legal counsel, with lawyer-client privilege. The Project on Government Oversight (POGO) will offer advice on whistleblowing, dissemination and relations with the media.

Needless to say, any unauthorized disclosure that exposes your superiors to embarrassment entails personal risk. Should you be identified as the source, the price could be considerable, including loss of career and possibly even prosecution. Some of us know from experience how difficult it is to countenance such costs. But continued silence brings an even more terrible cost, as our leaders persist in a disastrous course and young Americans come home in coffins or with missing limbs.

This is precisely what happened at this comparable stage in the Vietnam War. Some of us live with profound regret that we did not at that point expose the administration’s dishonesty and perhaps prevent the needless slaughter of 50,000 more American troops and some 2 to 3 million Vietnamese over the next ten years. We know how misplaced loyalty to bosses, agencies, and careers can obscure the higher allegiance all government officials owe the Constitution, the sovereign public, and the young men and women put in harm’s way. We urge you to act on those higher loyalties.

A hundred forty thousand young Americans are risking their lives every day in Iraq for dubious purpose. Our country has urgent need of comparable moral courage from its public officials. Truth-telling is a patriotic and effective way to serve the nation. The time for speaking out is now.

SIGNATORIES

Edward Costello, Former Special Agent (Counterintelligence), Federal Bureau of Investigation

Sibel Edmonds, Former Language Specialist, Federal Bureau of Investigation

Daniel Ellsberg, Former official, U.S. Departments of Defense and State

John D. Heinberg, Former Economist, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor

Larry C. Johnson, Former Deputy Director for Anti-Terrorism Assistance, Transportation Security, and Special Operations, Department of State, Office of the Coordinator for Counter Terrorism

John Brady Kiesling, Former Political Counselor, U.S. Embassy, Athens, Department of State

David MacMichael, Former Senior Estimates Officer, National Intelligence Council, Central Intelligence Agency

Ray McGovern, Former Analyst, Central Intelligence Agency

Philip G. Vargas, Ph.D., J.D., Dir. Privacy & Confidentiality Study, Commission on Federal Paperwork (Author/Director: “The Vargas Report on Government Secrecy”–CENSORED)

Ann Wright, Retired U.S. Army Reserve Colonel and U.S. Foreign Service Officer

Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatowski, recently retired from service in the Pentagon’s Office of Near East planning

Ironically, these same gentlemen were the first up in arms (and in the mainstream media) about the "leaking" of Valerie Plame’s (non-covert) status at the CIA.

Surprise, surprise, Ms. K. has a blog at the HuffPo left wing hate rag.

And this from National Review:

In her expose to the LaRouche organization, the substance of which was later published in The American Conservative magazine, Kwiatkowski alleged that there was a purge of desk officers within International Security Affairs. Not true. Kwiatkowski may have been upset that some colleagues received promotions when she did not. For example, Kwiatkowski implies that Larry Hanauer ceased being an Israel desk officer. But, he subsequently became special assistant to Jay Garner; that's a promotion, not a purge.

The Hill

The staffer acted appropriately by requesting the document for a committee member, and Hoekstra’s "unilateral commencement" of an investigation violates committee rules, Harman added.

She said Hoekstra admitted to her that his action was retaliation for the release of the parts of the Cunningham report.

"If you have a problem with me, why not deal with me directly?" Harman ended her letter.

The GOP leadership is capitalizing on the fight.

"I hope Democrats would never knowingly and illegally leak sensitive information just to score political points," said House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), "and that's what an investigation would determine.

"It is absolutely necessary that the House Intel Committee conduct a thorough review of the illegal leak of intelligence to The New York Times in wartime," Blunt said. "I support Chairman Hoekstra’s decision to suspend a staffer who may have orchestrated the leak until all the facts are known."

Nancy Pelosi has no shame:

WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 /U.S. Newswire/ -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi sent the following letter to Speaker Hastert today regarding Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra's unilateral suspension of a Democratic staffer's security clearance.

Below is the text of the letter:

October 20, 2006
The Honorable J. Dennis Hastert

Speaker
United States House of Representatives
H 232 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Speaker:

I am writing to reiterate the concerns I expressed to you earlier today about the outrageous action taken by Intelligence Committee Chairman Hoekstra, against a member of the Democratic staff.

There is nothing more important than keeping Americans safe. You and I share the critical goals of protecting our national security and safeguarding the intelligence processes upon which our security depends. Mr. Hoekstra's action furthers neither goal.

The unilateral decision by Mr. Hoekstra to suspend the clearances of a Democratic staff member without consultation with the Ranking Democrat, Congresswoman Harman, or an investigation of any kind is unprecedented and reckless. Any action against a staff member's clearance should come at the conclusion of an investigation, not before one even begins, and a decision to undertake an investigation should only come after consultation with the Ranking Democrat, as required by committee rules.

The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on global terrorism was sent to at least six committees of Congress in May of 2006. Hundreds of people in the executive branch were also aware of its contents. Absolutely no evidence has been provided by Mr. Hoekstra that the disclosure to the media of the NIE came from Congress in general or specifically from a member, or a staff member, of the House Intelligence Committee.

It is impossible to escape the conclusion - especially since it has been acknowledged by Republican members of the committee - that Mr. Hoekstra's unilateral action against the staff member was in retaliation for the release by Ms. Harman of an unclassified committee report on the means by which former Congressman Cunningham influenced Intelligence Committee business. The report was an embarrassment to the Republican leadership of the committee, as it should have been, however, that is no justification for the action taken against the staff member.

I urge you to personally review this matter immediately in light of the concerns I have expressed to you. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Nancy Pelosi
House Democratic Leader

http://www.usnewswire.com/

Time is reporting that Jane Harman is under FBI/DOJ investigation on a different matter. Harman is denying the Time report through lawyer, Ted Olson. Time is not the most reliable source, and the FBI/Justice are not commenting, so take this with a grain of salt for now. Clarice Feldlman's take on this story: "It's utter poppycock." Here is a snippet of a a long article:

Did a Democratic member of Congress improperly enlist the support of a major pro-Israel lobbying group to try to win a top committee assignment? That's the question at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors, who are examining whether Rep. Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, according to knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.

The sources tell TIME that the investigation by Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has simmered out of sight since about the middle of last year, is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman's behalf. Harman said Thursday in a voicemail message that any investigation of — or allegation of improper conduct by — her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous." On Friday, Washington GOP super lawyer Ted Olson left voicemail messages underscoring that Harman has no knowledge of any investigation. "Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you've had," Olson said. "She is not aware of any such investigation, does not believe that it is occurring, and wanted to make sure that you and your editors knew that as far as she knows, that's not true... . No one from the Justice Department has contacted her." It is not, however, a given that Harman would know that she is under investigation. In a follow-up phone call from California, Olson said Harman hired him this morning because she takes seriously the possibility of a media report about an investigation of her, even though she does not believe it herself.

A spokesman for AIPAC, a powerful Washington-based organization with more than 100,000 members across the U.S., denied any wrongdoing by the group and stressed that it is not taking sides in regards to the committee assignment. Spokespersons for Justice and the FBI declined to comment.

Michael Barone weighs in:

October 20, 2006

That NIE Leak Last Month

Where did that selective leak of the National Intelligence Estimate come from? Well, it's beginning to look like it came from a Democratic staffer on the House Intelligence Committee.

Committee Chairman Pete Hoekstra last week suspended and denied classified information to the unnamed staffer. According to Republican Rep. Ray LaHood, the staffer requested a copy of the April NIE three days before part of its contents appeared in the New York Times. LaHood, by the way, is not necessarily a partisan spear chucker; he is close to Speaker Dennis Hastert, but he is one of those members often chosen to preside over divisive debates on important issues because he is perceived to be fair and impartial. As you'll recall, the NYT story quoted the NIE as saying that our military action in Iraq has stirred up more jihadist activity. It conspicuously failed to quote the NIE as saying, as it did, that our withdrawal from Iraq would stir up even more jihadist activity.

If the staffer leaked the NIE to the Times, he could be criminally charged. And, of course, it's outrageous on every level for a staffer to leak classified material for political purposes. Especially a selective leak like this one.

Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the committee, has protested strongly against the staffer's suspension. Harman for several years has been a responsible member on the committee. But during the course of this calendar year, she has been making more shrill partisan statements and fewer thoughtful critiques. The most likely reason: pressure from the Democratic left.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is said to be determined to replace her with Alcee Hastings, the former federal judge who was impeached by the House for bribery and convicted and removed from office by the Senate. And Harman faced a challenger from the shrill left in the Democratic primary in her coastal Los Angeles area district. Harman has typically been re-elected without difficulty and has been willing to spend millions of her own money; her husband Sidney Harman is the dazzlingly successful sound-system manufacturer and philanthropist. Harman won the primary by only 62 to 38 percent. That's a narrow margin for a longtime incumbent (she was first elected in 1992, ran for governor and lost in the primary in 1998, then regained the seat in 2000). Her course since her primary tells us as much about the force of the left in the Democratic primary as Joe Lieberman's defeat two months later in his.

Posted at 12:08 PM by Michael Barone

Some of the comments over on JOM have included the observation that Jane Harman has changed recently. Where once she was liked and thought to be reasonable, the more recent Harman seems to have become more beligerant and partisan. I, too, noticed this, but didn't process it to any great extent. An entry at HuffPo by Tom Hayden may explain Harman's attitude ajustment:

"It must have been embarrassing for Rep. Jane Harman to read the front page of the Times this week that Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi "intends to force Harman to step down" from her slot on the House Intelligence Committee, partly because of "concern among Democrats that Harman is too moderate and inclined to accomodate the Republican agenda."

...

Like Joseph Lieberman in the Senate, Harman was a forceful hawk on Iraq when Democrats were trying [to] find a way out. Pelosi seemed [to] protect her status. Maxine Waters finally broke with Pelosi over Iraq, and formed an Out of Iraq congressional caucus, now enrolling some 70 members. One of Waters' first speeches after forming the caucus happened to be in Venice, a frustrated progressive enclave in Harman's district. In response to a question, Waters spontaneously called on the residents to vote against Harman. It was a breach of the usual incumbent protection ethos, revealing the depth of divisions within the party itself.

Comments

[Sue]

Awesome, Squig. ::grin::

[wayne]

Given that LaHood and Hoekstra admit they have no evidence that the Democratic staffer leaked the NIE, isn't your pronouncement a little premature?

[Pal2Pal (Sara)]

Wayne -- Hoesktra in his Fox interview today said that they are sure they have taken the right move here based on investigation of several items. I'm waiting for a transcript excerpt on this. Will post it as soon as I have it or someone finds it and sends it. Your point is valid. However, coincidence when it comes to intelligence leaks to the NYT is kind of far-fetched.

[Sue]

A simple denial from him or Harman that he provided the information to the NYTs would go a long way in making the pronouncement premature. Lots of time for both Harman and Pelosi to sound off about everything but denying he leaked.

[Specter]

wayne,

If you read, only LaHood said anything like you intimate. Hoekstra hasn't really said anything. But - what would you rather have happen? Let someone suspected of leaking continue to have access to classified info, or cut that access until the investigation is completed? Who is jumping the gun here?

[Pal2Pal (Sara)]

NOTE: Hoekstra said today that Hanauer is barred from seeing intelligence briefings and from access to the Committee, but he has not been fired and is still receiving his pay. Seems like a fair solution to me while the investigation continues.

[mockmook]

Still, the suspension should have been kept under wraps; no need "out" him while he is still just a suspect.

[charles austin]

Remember the good old days when the seriousness of the accusation virtually required an investigation to be performed? Oh, sorry, that was when accusations were made against Republicans. Meanwhile, Democrats now demand that a potential, dare I say it, traitor be reinstated immediately, and how dare we question their patriotism?

[Sue]

Still, the suspension should have been kept under wraps; no need "out" him while he is still just a suspect.

Why?

[JorgXMcKie]

Oh, yeah. I also remember how all those Democrats leapt to remind us that people should be considered innocent until proven guilty in the Plame leak. I was so proud of their committment to principle, Charles Austin. Pardon me while I gag.

[nitpicker]

After Pat's Birthday

Posted on Oct 19, 2006

By Kevin Tillman

It is Pat's birthday on November 6, and elections are the day after. It gets me thinking about a conversation I had with Pat before we joined the military. He spoke about the risks with signing the papers. How once we committed, we were at the mercy of the American leadership and the American people. How we could be thrown in a direction not of our volition. How fighting as a soldier would leave us without a voice... until we get out.

Much has happened since we handed over our voice:

Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can't be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.

Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them. Somehow that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few "bad apples" in the military.

Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It's interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air as his body comes apart and his skin melts to the seat.

Somehow nobody is accountable for this.

In a democracy, the policy of the leaders is the policy of the people. So don't be shocked when our grandkids bury much of this generation as traitors to the nation, to the world and to humanity. Most likely, they will come to know that "somehow" was nurtured by fear, insecurity and indifference, leaving the country vulnerable to unchecked, unchallenged parasites.

Luckily this country is still a democracy. People still have a voice. People still can take action. It can start after Pat's birthday.

Brother and Friend of Pat Tillman,

Kevin Tillman

[Editor's note: Kevin Tillman joined the Army with his brother Pat in 2002, and they served together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pat was killed in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. Kevin was discharged in 2005.]

[charles austin]

Well, that's what we call a non sequitur, nitpicker.

[M. Simon]

It looks like the Dems are taking a page out of the Nixon playbook. Except that Nixon is no loger with us.

Thank the Maker.

The Rs are much smarter this time. They are going after the leakers publicly through regular channels.

This one ought to peak right around 7 Nov. Foley is history. So is Foleygate.

[Wayne]

I'm merely pointing out that:

1) You are assuming this fellow is guilty despite the lack of any actual evidence; and

2) Given the lack of evidence, the idea that this will effect the election is ludicrous. I heard the same thing about the vastly overblown Reid situation and that has already passed over.

And I am very much looking forward to seeing Santorum return to private life.

[Larry]

Pelosi: "Any action against a staff member's clearance should come at the conclusion of an investigation, not before one even begins." You can't make this stuff up. Is the Dem leadership serious about national security? The bugger is caught pink-handed, so keep his butt out of the vault. He hasn't lost his job or pay. Hoekstra might've been smarter to plant something and see if it got passed.

Someone must have something extra juicy on Harman in light of the way she's turned 180. Or maybe she's just knuckling under to Pelosi to keep her committee post.

Congratz on the instalanche, sweety.

[Dan S]

You can tell Pelosi knows nothing about security. If security matters, you first take steps to ensure as solid a security as you can, then you sort out the facts. Suspending someone tied by circumstantial evidence (which the timeline is) while you investigate further is simple damage control.

I can't help but wonder if there wasn't a canary trap involved here too. There may be evidence that isn't being made public due to the methods being used to try to find the leakers.

A suspension is nothing. If he's clean he will be cleared. A suspension is not an indictment or firing (aka forced resignation).

[Dave in W-S]

As has been pointed out several times above, Hanauer has had his clearance and access to classified pulled. He hasn't been fired. As far putting his name out there, I don't recall that there was a press conference announcing this. In other words, it doesn't seem to me as though there was a general attempt to throw Hanauer to the wolves as part of some publicity stunt. I could be mistaken, but didn't the "outing" of Hanauer's identity somewhat coincide with the letters from Harmon and Pelosi demanding that the "witch hunt" be called off? So where did his identity surface?

On the other hand, Hanauer has some potentially disturbing prior ties that may have helped focus attention on him. I have read numerous descriptions of him as a long-time civil servant who was abruptly replaced by the Bush administration in their rush to the Iraq war. Let's look at that for a koment.

Hanauer entered the work force in 1995, when he graduated from Fletcher. From then until 2003, he held a number of very interesting positions within Defense. But he still had only 8 years of work experience and thus a more finite number of connections than someone with many years of service and numerous assignments.

Commentary on his time at defense, and especially at NESA, along with the circumstances of his departure, per the link that MacRanger posted, has been provided by some very interesting sources. Mother Jones Magazine has been a progressive rabble rouser for many years, while NESA coworker Karen Kwiatkowski has been an outspoken critic of what Mother Jones describes as the "neocon takeover of this government", since retiring from the USAF immediately after being replaced at NESA. Kwiatkowski is, as noted above, linked solidly into the leaker mafia, with such notables as Ray McGovern, Larry Johnson, et al.

All in all, a very intriguing mix of names associated with Mr. Hanauer:
Directly - Harmon, Kwiatkowski, Pelosi
Indirectly - Larry Johnson, Ray McGovern, Mary McCarthy (whom the previous 3 staunchly defended, as well taking the offense on the Plame/Wislon affair).

I sincerely hope the Republicans are prepared to see this through. I will be very interested to see where this investigation takes us.