Washblog

Congressman Alcee Hastings and I have had extensive consultations, and today I advised him that I would select someone else as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Alcee Hastings has always placed national security as his highest priority. He has served our country well, and I have full confidence that he will continue to do so.

So who does that leave?  

Jane Harman.  No way, IMO does Pelosi choose Harman.  Harman hasn't done enough of a job to confront the Republicans.  Not only has she been too spineless, but there's the cloud of suspicion lingering over her due to the AIPAC spy scandal investigation .  The last thing we need is someone in AIPAC's pocket overseeing the House Intelligence Committee.  It goes a long ways to explaining her seeming lack of spine.

Oct. 25, 2006 - While reportedly under investigation for her ties to an influential pro-Israel lobbying organization, California Rep. Jane Harman last month hosted a private dinner for the group that was attended by two top Bush administration officials--Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.

The Sept. 13 dinner took place at the home of Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and was attended by over 120 top financial backers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The highlight of the evening was a panel discussion in which Harman played the host, questioning Negroponte and Chertoff about Mideast developments, international terrorism and homeland-security issues, according to an AIPAC official.

...last month's event raises new questions about recent reports that the FBI was investigating whether Harman, an outspoken supporter of Israel, last year may have agreed to improperly influence an ongoing Justice Department probe of AIPAC

As you'd know from my ongoing series The Usual Suspects, AIPAC is directly linked to Israels espionage efforts against the United States.  Jane Harman CANNOT be allowed to become chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence.  That would be letting the wolves guard the hen house.

Is it any surprise the NYTimes endorses her?

Fortunately, Pelosi has seemingly indicated she's not going with Harman:

BLITZER:  Do you think Jane Harman would be the appropriate chair, Alcee Hastings would be the appropriate chairman?

PELOSI: What you have to understand about the Intelligence Committee is the speaker of the House and the minority leader, on the first day of Congress, appoint a whole new Intelligence Committee each term. Sometimes they reappoint the same people. Sometimes they don't, but there is no seniority on the Intelligence Committee.

Which leaves Pelosi with one likely alternative:

Silvestre Reyes.  The Representative from Texas has to be considered the front-runner at this point.  His nomination would make the Hispanic Caucus happy.  He's a senior member of the Select Intelligence Committee as well as the Armed Services Commmittee.  Unlike Harman, Reyes voted against going to war with Iraq.  

However, Reyes voted to make the Patriot Act permanent.  He voted yes on Bush's national energy policy.  Voted no on raising CAFE standards that would give incentives to alternative fuel vehicles and raise mpg standards on cars, trucks and SUV's.  Voted no on prohibiting oil drilling and development in ANWR.

At least he voted yes on the Kyoto Protocols.

While it may not seem relevant how Reyes votes with Big Oil, I feel that it is an important consideration considering that the main reason we're at war in Iraq is because of their oil.

So what does all this make of Reyes?  Damned if I know.  He goes against the neocon masterplan by voting no to the war in Iraq, is in big oils pocket.

And he's gotta be considered the odds on bet to be The Man.

Which brings us to the darkhorse candidate that many liberals are clamoring for:

Rush Holt.  Rush Holt pushed for the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act, which demanded a verifiable paper trail so that we wouldn't disenfranchise voters (read: let the Republicans keep cheating us out of the Democracy so many REAL patriots have died defending.)

Holt stood up against Big Oil, voting No on ANWR drillings, No on Bush's energy policy, Yes on raising CAFE standards, and Yes on implementing the Kyoto Protocol.  He voted against invading Iraq.  In addition he fully backed network neutrality.

SANE rates him at 100% for having a pro-peace voting record.

He's also a former intelligence analyst at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, specializing in nuclear technology.

And he's a member of the DLC.

Now, as much as I HATE the DLC, here's a man who's against Big Oil and George Bush.  Who openly questions the Usual Suspects and thinks that the nuclear intelligence on Iran is poor.  So despite his association with the dreaded DLC, he's the man most qualified for the job IMO.

This, perhaps, is the person Nancy Pelosi SHOULD pick.  

And then there's always Bremerton Washingtons own:

Norm Dicks.  Norm Dicks, a former member of the House Intelligence Committee, also stood up to Big Oil by voting No on drilling in ANWR.  Voting Yes on raising CAFE standards, No on the Bush energy policy, and Yes on Kyoto.

SANE rates him at 89% for a pro-peace voting record.

This strikes me as strange because Norm Dicks is a Hawk.  He voted for the War with Iraq.  He's always been a liberal Hawk.  But then again, as the Seattle Times pointed out:

Dicks, a former member of the House Intelligence Committee, says he's particularly angry about the intelligence that supported going to war.

Without the threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), he said, he would "absolutely not" have voted for the war.

The Bush administration has accused some members of Congress of rewriting history by claiming the president misled Americans about the reasons for going to war. Congress, the administration says, saw the same intelligence and agreed Iraq was a threat.

But Dicks says the intelligence was "doctored." And he says the White House didn't plan for and deploy enough troops for the growing insurgency.

"A lot of us relied on [former CIA director] George Tenet. We had many meetings with the White House and CIA, and they did not tell us there was a dispute between the CIA, Commerce or the Pentagon on the WMDs," he said

Norm Dicks is a respected member of the House that many Democrats would support and who, if the spin coming from the press is to be believed, may have an axe to grind against this administration.

The weeks ahead should be interesting for Nancy Pelosi.