Harman On NPR: 'I'm Outraged Over Wiretaps.' Still, More Questions Than Answers.

Yesterday, the story was about Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and whether or not she told a suspected Israeli agent that she would lobby the Justice Department to go easy on two pro-Israeli lobbyists who were under investigation for espionage if the agent would use his influence with incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi to help Harman become the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

Harman's alleged conversation, thought to have taken place in either 2005 or 2006, was apparently captured on an NSA wiretape. The story was broken by Jeff Stein of Congressional Quarterly; it later found itself all over the blogosphere (including here), and on the front page of today's New York Times.

The part of Stein's story that could not be confirmed was that then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the DOJ to back off from any investigation of Harman in exchange for Harman's support for the warrantless wiretapping program. I'm told that Justice Department sources say such a scenario was highly unlikely.

But the headlines today were mostly about Harman and the potential of a quid pro quo regarding helping the two lobbyists, who worked for the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), in exchange for advancing her ambitions.

Today started with the congresswoman on the offensive. She called on Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department to release all transcripts of her recorded conversations. She denied ever seeking favorable treatment for the two lobbyists -- though her statement maintained that it was "entirely appropriate to converse with advocacy organizations and constituent groups." And she said the thought of her being wiretapped was "outrageous" and should have a "chilling effect on other elected officials who may find themselves in my situation."

Today, on NPR's "All Things Considered," host Robert Siegel interviewed Harman. And, at least to these ears, some of her denials seemed a little less than, well, total denials. Or maybe some of her answers seemed -- and this is just my opinion -- less than complete answers.

Whatever, the interview is worth a listen (link below).

Right off the bat, when Siegel asked her if she remembers the "phone call in question," Harman responded with, "We don't know if there was a phone call." But shortly afterward, in her same answer, she said, "I have to say I am outraged that I may have been wiretapped by my government." Oh, that phone call.

When Siegel asked her if the reported transcripts of the conversations with the Israeli lobbyist were correct, she said, "Well, how do we know? That's why I have written [AG Holder] asking him to release any transcripts of any interceptions of my conversations without any redactions ... and then we'll see what I may or may not have said four years ago."

Dana Houle, writing on the Daily Kos blog, called the interview a "train wreck":

She repeatedly called for a release of all transcripts of conversations in which she was purportedly picked up on a wiretap, and then, she said, "We'll see what I may or may not have said."

But then she screwed up. She raised the question of whether the wiretaps were legal--which implied that she accepts their existence, contradicting her previous claims of skepticism that the conversations in fact took place. She wondered whether other members of Congress were or are being wiretapped. And then she stepped in it further by claiming, "The person I talked to was an American citizen."

Siegel immediately caught the inconsistency, asking, "but if you know it was an American citizen...." He then immediately followed up with, "you're saying it was an American citizen..." Harman deflected both questions, instead declaring it an "abuse of power that Members of Congress are wiretapped and maybe some part of some investigation" and "I was never told by the Justice Dept that I was being investigated." This latter bizarre statement implies she thinks she's entitled to something other citizens are not: notification that their possible illegal actions are being monitored, so they would then know to no longer conduct their potential illegal activities in a manner enabling wthe DoJ to build a case.

If Harman thought going on NPR was going to help her, she's most certainly proven herself politically tone deaf. As bad as things were for Jane Harman at 3:59 PM EDT, they were much, much worse by 4:15 PM EDT.

Here is the complete transcript, as provided by NPR media relations. You can also hear the interview at this same site. You make the call.

Postscript: I know, I know, it's lots of fun to turn the comments section into a denunciation of Israel and U.S. foreign policy. And how NPR protects Israel. Or how NPR hates Israel. Or why we should all be reading the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Sigh. Hopefully, some of the comments will have to do with Rep. Harman.