If you were waiting for the Republican October Surprise, it appears to have arrived. The first blow comes from Time magazine, which does an absolute hit piece on Rep. Jane Harman accusing her of inappropriately enlisting American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) officials to lobby for the retention of her position on the Intelligence Committee. The problem? Time’s only sources are “knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.” In addition, Harman has no knowledge of any investigation. She hired Ted Olsen to defend her and Mr. Olsen told Time, “Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you’ve had. 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.”
As I noted yesterday, Harman is also being harassed in other ways. But this allegation calls her loyalty into question and undoubtedly plays into their bigger gambit, the attempted outing of Teddy Kennedy as a traitor to his country.
In his book, which came out this week, [Paul] Kengor, [a political science professor at Grove City College and the author of new book, The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism] focuses on a KGB letter written at the height of the Cold War that shows that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) offered to assist Soviet leaders in formulating a public relations strategy to counter President Reagan’s foreign policy and to complicate his re-election efforts.
The letter, dated May 14, 1983, was sent from the head of the KGB to Yuri Andropov, who was then General Secretary of the Soviet Union’s Communist Party.
In his letter, KGB head Viktor Chebrikov offered Andropov his interpretation of Kennedy’s offer. Former U.S. Sen. John Tunney (D-Calif.) had traveled to Moscow on behalf of Kennedy to seek out a partnership with Andropov and other Soviet officials, Kengor claims in his book.
If either one of these stories is accurate they are disturbing. At this point I have no way to assess their accuracy, so I merely point to the light sourcing and the timing.
Any time the media spends asking about the loyalty of Democrats is time not spent talking about the failed policies and law-breaking of the Republicans.
The GOP Campaign Strategy so far:
1. Only the GOP can save you from ____________.
2. Democrats are traitors and want the terrorists to win.
3. A Dem victory = Mushroom Clouds sprouting up all over.
4.
WolvesStakes. High Stakes.5. Tax cuts! More Tax Cuts!
6. All politicians are crooked, not just Republicans, so you might as well vote GOP!
7. Clinton has a penis!
8. Black (and brown) people should be seen (on TV in sports preferably) but their voices should not be heard when it counts: at the ballot box.
9. Hey, media: Voter turnout will be low, but the GOP base will turnout real, real big thanks to our star spangled GOTV effort.
10. cough – Diebold – cough
Yeah, some of those are redundant.
Welcome to the world of what will be if Dems gain ANY power in DC. Do any of us think that the “right wing conspiracy” that spent 8 years trolling for an issue to bring Clinton down will just go silently into the night? We’ve been so busy thinking about what Dem chairs of committees could accomplish by way of investigations of Bush. I’ll predict here that we’ll see a steady stream of this about Dems over the next two years if they gain control of either House of Senate. The only question left is how much the media will follow these stories as the main narrative in the political sphere. Looks like these stories answer that question for us.
Thanks for saying it, NL. This is why I haven’t been able to get excited about the prospect of Dems taking back Congress — not that I think they’re just as bad as R’s, ’cause I don’t, but that I know how fickle the media are, and who their real masters are. Why else have the “news” shows and papers turned on the R’s to the extent they have, these last few months? They know the real “fun” begins when the Reps are in full attack dog mode.
I wish this triviafest did turn out to be the best surprise the neofascists have in store. Nobody who hasn’t already drunk the koolaid is going to give a damn about any of this, much less drivel from some obscure fundie academic. I’m sure el Diablo can do better than this.
Hey if we are reliving history:
4)Baby Bush W, went to Harvard B school instead of finishing out his National Guard “Tour of Duty”, during a time of “War.” I wonder if that was “tough” and if W “sacrified” a lot, and if his lack of service dishonored those who did serve this country, instead of going to Harvard Business School.
Anything else that has been swept under that “republican rug.”
The slime machine is kicking into gear, but I don’t see how these allegations hurt Democratic candidates other than Harmon and Kennedy, who aren’t facing serious challenges afaik.
The Kennedy thing seems ridiculous on it’s face. Having read several Republican books, I don’t put much faith in their connection with reality much less facts. Willingness to propagandize and lie seems to be a common denominator among the authors.
Was Ted Kennedy really so powerful politically in 1983 that he could have another U.S. Senator (from California no less) act as his errand boy? If he was going to do something like this, wouldn’t it make a lot more sense to use a less-visible channel? Still, if you can’t trust the KGB to be honest, who can you trust? So I guess they have a point there.
I think the surprise is on the Republicants this year.
Kirsten Gillibrand Congressional Candidate in NY-20,
… will be live-blogging today in the Blue America fund-raising series at:
Firedoglake
Saturday, Oct. 21
2:00 PM eastern
Please come meet Kirsten for yourself at 2:00 PM!
Peace,
Andrew
Time magazine, don’t they employ Marc Cooper? What would they know about loyalty and patriotism?
This is a mischaracterization of the article. First, it is not a “hit piece” and second it does not “accuse” her of anything. It merely notes potential evidence of possibly inappropriate actions taken by Harman &/or Aipac. It makes no judgment. In fact, at one point it notes that if Haim Saban did lobby Pelosi on Harman’s behalf there would be nothing wrong with that as long as he wasn’t influenced by another party to do so.
The notion that this is a Republican cocktail brewed for the elections is far-fetched. There are those of us among progressive Democrats who feel that Aipac is an absolutely pernicious influence on U.S. Mideast policy. Don’t you acknowledge that what is essentially a lobby for the State of Israel should be closely monitored to ensure that it doesn’t cross over the line & gain excessive influence over U.S. foreign policy and intelligence information?
Besides, the Repubs are in so much trouble now it would take 1000 Jane Harman/Aipac stories to save them.