The unfolding drama regarding Representative Jane Harman(D-CA), AIPAC, former AG Alberto Gonzalez, former CIA head and then-NSA chief Hayden, the New York Times, and the Bush warrantless wiretapping story has just gotten even weirder. Greg Sargent over at the Plum Line just got confirmation from NYT spokeswoman Catherine Mathis that Jane Harman did in fact urge the paper to not publish the story at the request of the Bush administration, and it looks like Harman managed to prevent the story from being published before the 2004 elections.
The statement from Mathis, and the implications of this, are below the jump.
This is the latest according to the New York Times;
Congresswoman Harman spoke to Washington Bureau Chief Phil Taubman in late October or early November, 2004, apparently at the request of General Hayden. She urged that The Times not publish the story. She did not speak to me, and I don’t remember her being a significant factor in my decision. In 2005, when we were getting ready to publish, Phil met with a group of congressional leaders familiar with the eavesdropping program, including Ms. Harman. They all argued that The Times should not publish. The Times published the story a few days later.
Sometime around late October and early November? Did Jane Harman prevent the truth from coming out about then-President George W. Bush and his policy to eavesdrop on Americans without a warrant? It certainly appears so. What I really want to know is if this prevented the story from coming out before November 4th of 2004, election day between John Kerry and George W. Bush. Did Congresswoman Harman help secure George W. Bush's reelection?
More importantly, why? Was she being blackmailed with the recorded phone-call? Why was her phone tapped, anyways? Was there a trade-off between Harman and the Bush administration through former AG Gonzalez?
This has only just begun. Stay tuned.