Posts Tagged ‘Panetta’

Today the controversy over what Nancy Pelosi knew and when she knew it took a dramatic turn.  CIA Director Leon Panetta issued a memo saying that the CIA doesn’t mislead Congress. 

Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values. As the Agency indicated previously in response to Congressional inquiries, our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing “the enhanced techniques that had been employed.” Ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened.  

This memo is a big deal.  This is an arm of the executive branch taking a direct shot (in return) at the sitting Speaker of the U.S. House.  There is no way this memo was written or released without the direct knowledge of White House COS Rahm Emanual and maybe even the President himself.

That’s what we call high stakes politics, and I’m guessing the boys from Chicago are going to win this against the Madame from San Francisco.  By the time the Sunday shows come around, there will be discussions about how long she can stay as Speaker.

When Obama announced the nomination of Leon Panetta, I wrote a post that criticized the decision as a mistake and a power play.  I’m rethinking my position based on this op-ed written by Congressman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), the former Chairman and current ranking Republican on the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee.

I know Mr. Hoekstra pretty well.  He is a close friend of Congressman John Shadegg and I’ve seen him in action.  He is smart, funny, and very independent.  He went to war with President Bush over the No Child Left Behind bill while serving on the Education and Workforce Committee.

Most importantly, Hoekstra takes his job very seriously.  Since his appointment to the Intelligence Committee, he has worked tirelessly to ensure the United States is as safe as possible.  So when he writes a column applauding Obama tapping Panetta to head the CIA, it deserves notice.

It’s clear from his column that Hoekstra has battled the CIA for years, and he is pretty fed up.  Here is  the operative paragraph of his piece:

The CIA’s repeated failure to keep Congress fully and currently informed requires a shake-up in the Agency’s senior leadership. I am encouraged, therefore, that President-elect Obama has tapped Leon Panetta, a man with significant managerial and Washington experience — outside of the intelligence community — to be the next head of the CIA. I support Panetta’s nomination as part of what I hope will be the first step to clean up the agency and make it more accountable to Congress and therefore the American people. True, he is not part of the intelligence club. That is a positive. A fresh perspective is needed.

If it’s good enough for Pete Hoekstra, it should be good enough for all of us.

The selection of Leon Panetta as the new CIA Director is so bad that even leading Democrats are criticizing the choice.  The LA Times is reporting  that incoming Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Diane Feinstein, was not informed of the decision and that she may oppose the appointment.   Outgoing Senate Intel Chairman, John D. Rockefeller is said to “have concerns” about the nomination.

I think this is a blunder by Obama.  Panetta is a former Congressman (he was Chairman of the Budget Committee) then served as Clinton’s budget director before being tapped as Clinton’s Chief of Staff.  None of his experience prepares him to lead one of the most important agencies of the federal government as we continue to battle terrorism across the globe.

My knowledge of intelligence issues is limited to Robert Ludlum  novels, but here is a quote from the article that struck a cord with me: “If you go in thinking your experience someplace else is going to transfer, it doesn’t,” said the former high-ranking CIA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

I understand that the CIA has been a disaster, but bringing in someone with no intelligence background is a mistake.  This is a political power-play by Obama Rahm Emmanuel.  Besides, how many Clinton alums are we going to have to tolerate?