Tuesday
06Jan2009
Tuesday, January 6, 2009 at 01:40AM
Leon Panetta is Obama's pick for CIA director 
Former California congressman and Clinton aide has little experience with spy agencies. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, incoming chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, indicates she might oppose the pick.
Obama picks another Clinton Hack for a high ranking position, I wonder if he even realizes how this pick will help Hillary in her plans with the state dept.
His new intelligence committee director is not even pleased.
Panetta, who was chief of staff to President Clinton, is regarded as a bright political operative and highly capable manager. But if confirmed by the Senate, he would be among the few directors in agency history with no prior experience at one of the nation's spy services.
Here is the comments from NROs Corner.
Panetta, Obama, and the Senate [Byron York]
On Panetta — in addition to opinions in The Corner, there is the ever-so-slightly more important opinion of the new chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein:
I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director. I know nothing about this, other than what I’ve read. My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.
Ouch. It is interesting that Obama would settle on a CIA director without even giving a heads-up to the Intelligence Committee chairman, especially one of his own party. Word is Obama didn't tell outgoing chairman Jay Rockefeller, either.
Add to that this piece:
A Viper @ Obama's Bosom
Clinton moves to widen role of State Department
WASHINGTON: Even before taking office, Hillary Rodham Clinton is seeking to build a more powerful State Department, with a bigger budget, high-profile special envoys to trouble spots and an expanded role in dealing with global economic issues at a time of crisis. (in other words implementing Clinton NOT Obama Policy)
Clinton is recruiting Jacob Lew, the budget director under President Bill Clinton, as one of two deputies, according to people close to the Obama transition team. Lew's focus, they said, would be on increasing the share of financing that goes to the diplomatic corps. (cut straight out of the military budget)
He and James Steinberg, a deputy national security adviser in the Clinton administration, are to be Hillary Clinton's chief lieutenants. (a team designed to undermine the WOT)
Nominations of deputy secretaries, like Clinton's, would be subject to confirmation by the Senate.
The incoming administration is also likely to name several envoys, officials said, reviving a practice of the Clinton administration, when Richard Holbrooke, Dennis Ross and other diplomats played a central role in mediating disputes in the Balkans and the Middle East. (and not one will be appointed without Clinton's approval, or they will have no power ET all if not her choice)
As Clinton puts together her senior team, officials said, she is also trying to carve out a bigger role for the State Department in economic affairs, where the Treasury has dominated during the Bush years. She has sought advice from Laura D'Andrea Tyson, an economist who headed Bill Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers. (sounds like the formation of an unvoted for alternate government)
The steps seem intended to strengthen the role of diplomacy after a long stretch, particularly under Secretary of State Colin Powell, in which the Pentagon, the vice president's office and even the intelligence agencies held considerable sway over U.S. foreign policy. (in other words nothing regarding the war gets done without Hillary's power)
Given Hillary Clinton's prominence, expanding the department's portfolio could bring on conflict with other powerful cabinet members. (no shit really?)
Clinton and President-elect Barack Obama have not settled on specific envoys or missions, although Ross's name has been mentioned as a possible Middle East envoy, as have those of Holbrooke and Martin Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
The Bush administration has made relatively little use of special envoys. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has personally handled most peacemaking initiatives, which has meant a punishing schedule of Middle East missions, often with meager results. (Hillary will only go if a victory is eminent or she has to put someones balls in her lock box)
"There's no question that there is a reinvention of the wheel here," said Aaron David Miller, a public policy analyst at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "But it's geared not so much as a reaction to Bush as to a fairly astute analysis of what's going to work in foreign policy." (according to the Clinton's, who let terror build around the entire world)
With so many problems, including Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan, Miller said it made sense for the White House to farm out some of the diplomatic heavy lifting. (like they have a choice or a clue)
In addition to the Middle East, one Democratic foreign policy adviser said, Holbrooke might be considered for an appointment as special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and possibly Iran. The adviser said the decision had not been made. (already the assumption that we will negotiate with the terrorists in Iran)
A transition official dismissed as "speculation" reports in Indian newspapers that Obama was considering appointing Bill Clinton as a special envoy to deal with Kashmir issues.
But another transition official confirmed that Obama's foreign policy advisers were discussing the possibility of appointing a special envoy to India. Steinberg, who is the dean of the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, would probably coordinate the work of any special envoys, the official said. (no envoy gets approved with out the Hilda beasts nod)
The recruitment of Lew - for a position that was not filled in the Bush administration - suggests that Hillary Clinton is determined to win a larger share of financial resources for the department. Lew, a well-connected figure who was once an aide to the House speaker Thomas O'Neill, now works for Citigroup in a unit that oversees hedge funds. (ahh yes more money to funnel to the beast)
"If we're going to re-establish diplomacy as the critical tool in America's arsenal," a senior transition official said, "you need someone who can work both the budget and management side. He has very strong relations on the Hill; he knows the inner workings of how to manage a big enterprise." (so no more military just diplomats, sounds like the perfect plan for the terrorists to rebuild their strength)
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private, said Clinton was being supported in her push for more resources by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and by Obama's incoming national security adviser, General James Jones Jr. (both strong supporters in Diplomacy or do nothing rhetoric)
For years, some Pentagon officials have complained that jobs like the economic reconstruction in Afghanistan and Iraq have been added to the military's burden when they could have been handled by a robust foreign service. (bullshit)
"The Pentagon would like to turn functionality over to civilian resources, but the resources are not there," the official said. "We're looking to have a State Department that has what it needs." (notice no one is quoted for that statement)
Clinton's push for a more vigorous economic team, one of her advisers said, stems from her conviction that the State Department needs to play a part in the recovery from the global financial crisis. (yeah full involvement in flowing American tax dollars to buy off terrorist, except it doesn't work)
Economic issues also underpin some of the most important diplomatic relationships, notably with China. (maybe she'll sell them some more missile technology)
In recent years, the Treasury Department, led by Henry Paulson Jr., has dominated policy toward China. Paulson leads a "strategic economic dialogue" with China that involves several agencies. It is not yet clear who will pick up that role in the Obama administration, although Vice President-elect Joseph Biden Jr. is frequently mentioned as a possibility. (yeah will see)
Hillary
Obama
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (12)
Interesting choice for Obama. Panetta's spook creditials are weak though his Washington skills are huge. Perhaps he wants a guy in there to restore crdibility to a discredited agency. The Dems in Congress are more pissed that he didn't consult them, which is a nice change from the Obama who sought to please everyone.
Frankly, I can't think of a CIA Director with less spook experience - and that may be a good thing. Maybe George H. W. Bush had as little when he got appointed.
He'll be confirmed, but may have sweat a little.
"Frankly, I can't think of a CIA Director with less spook experience "
It's not that unusual, Clinton's second CIA director was John Deutch, a chemist with no relevent experience, Reagan's was William Casey who was a political flunky. Casey was a disaster and Deutch was useless.
Mind you one of the CIA's best directors was John McCone under Kennedy and Johnson who had no military or intelligence background.
Now experience doesn't matter? Only matters when's it's Palin?
Obama and his Administration? No problem if they're all a bunch of "know nothings?" (or no nothings, as Troll mite sae)
What a joke.
Do you think his "Jesuit" education may have something to do with it? lol
A leaf out of Brown's playbook; - "We will learn from our mistakes!", and just like socialists everywhere, they never will...
The excuse will be that they will bring a 'fresh mind' to the post, or 'A new broom sweeps clean', - if only any of them even had a mind, or a broom!...
But that is what you get when you buy a book by the cover and not on the content!
Mahons - IMHO (and no offence) but you made the most idiotic comment it would be possible to construct.
I truly hope the next time you're on a passenger jet, the pilot turns out to be someone with ZERO experience flying an actual friggin' plane -- but considerable "arse-licking" political skills.
I suggest it is quite likely Panetta will NOT be confirmed, but will step aside, Richardson style because sufficient elected DEMOCRATS will be extremely nervous about appointing a doofus that will come back to bite them voter-wise if the CIA misses the NEXT big attack.
This is a Harriet Miers moment for Obama
Patty/Jack,
Good points.
Jack - nice new name. One of the things the incoming President is looking for is to impose accountability and control over the CIA, which has not experienced its brightest 8 year period. I suspect he appointed Pannetta because of his management skills and to have an outsider bring the agency into order, something an intelligence lifer might not be able to do.
Your airline analogy is wrong, we aren't talking about replacing pilots, but replacingthe head of an airline (most of whom have little experience I would wager as pilots).
Feinstein is pissed about not being informed.
The confirmation hearings should be very interesting
I suspect he appointed Pannetta because of his management skills and to have an outsider bring the agency into order, something an intelligence lifer might not be able to do.
Look I'm not trying to be deliberately insulting here, but the idea that an "outsider" can 'bring the CIA to order' (sic) is absurd; and rather silly.
Let's establish a few facts here. The CIA has spent the past 8 years being undermined from within by Democrat appointed operatives.
The Bush administration has been systematically destabilized by leak after leak from said operatives.
Porter Goss was singled out for destruction by forces within the agency. Goss was a former CIA operative. And he lasted 10 months
All this is public knowledge.
Goss arrived as CIA Director on September 24, 2004. He had promised the US Senate that he would bring change and reform to the CIA.
He left May 5, 2006.
He brought with him five personal staff that were to implement change.
But that embedded provocatuers (Democrat appointed leakers) were having none of it.
Now if they can do that to the reformed minded former agent, with the ear of ther sitting President, and he had promised that reform on his confirmation... are you seriously believing PANETTA will be able to deliver.
Besides, Panetta's role will be to make the CIA less effective, in my thinking.
Jack, Jack this group can't handle things like thr TRUTH about how the NY Times has been handed things to hurt the effort from the beggining and someone who is a left wing clinton idealogue surely is going to put a stop to that right away...lol
Excellent point, Jack.