That's the takeaway from the CQ story. Charges of anti-Semitism from influential Jewish speakers dissuaded journalists for a few years. No longer. Andrew Sullivan writes that it's just "another day at the office" for AIPAC and says, "Take it away, Professor Walt!" Robert Dreyfuss at the Nation:
I've followed this fairly closely, but I've never heard of Saban being
referred to an an Israeli "agent." Certainly, he is obsessed with
Israel. If this is true, then there ought to be a full investigation of
Harman, Saban, and AIPAC.
referred to an an Israeli "agent." Certainly, he is obsessed with
Israel. If this is true, then there ought to be a full investigation of
Harman, Saban, and AIPAC.
THE FIRST COMMENT UNDER THE DREYFUSS POST @ "THE NATION":
"The FBI investigation of Harman should be reopened. She should remove herself from any committee involving AIPAC, Israel, foreign policy and domestic spying. Then, she should resign.
Her interference with the NYT probably gave us another 4 yrs of Bush. Remember that AIPAC and Israel felt that Kerry was not sufficiently supportive of Israel, and too willing to talk to the Palestinians. The lobbyists who bought and owned Harman wanted Bush in office for another 4 yrs. One way to do that was to prevent the NYT from blowing the cover off of Bush's illegal spying. Harman played her role well. Israel got 4 more years of Bush. NYT maintained its silence. Harman got $80,000+ in campaign bribes from AIPAC."
- Posted by AGNOSTIC at 04/20/2009 @ 10:38am
That's absolutely how I see it (re: the above comment).
Jeff Stein responds to the 'Why now?' question in the online chat about the story today with a non-answer, saying he's had the information for some time and "was just now able to give it attention".
If online chatters were allowed a followup question, the further exploration would be, "But why is it now that you're able to give it attention? Is it because it's now safer to cover the lobby?"