Posted on 08/19/2009 7:07:34 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
The Daily Beast is a center-left/RINO news outlet, so for them to kneecap The One this way is nothing short of shocking. So awful that I don’t even know how to excerpt it. Arguably the most damning story to emerge about Obama’s administrative competence since the inauguration.
Remember a few months ago when Panetta wet his pants about some supposed CIA plan to assassinate Al Qaeda leaders that Congress hadn’t been briefed on (but which had been public knowledge since 2002)? Funny thing:
The Daily Beast has learned that shortly after his electrifying June 24 disclosure, Panetta spoke personally with each of his three predecessors—George Tenet, Porter Goss, and Michael Hayden—and only then realized the mistake he’d made about the program… Panetta ordered an internal CIA inquiry into the matter, headed by a widely respected senior official. In his private conversations with his three predecessors, Panetta “as much as admitted” to them (in the words of one CIA insider) that he’d misunderstood. Without explicitly apologizing, he assured the men—whom he’d in effect accused of breaking the law—not to worry:The whole thing would quietly go away. He told them that he’d been pre-briefed by the officer conducting the internal inquiry, and that when the report came out it would indeed back them up. It would come swaddled in vague banalities calling for improving communication between the CIA and Congress.According to a half-dozen sources, including several very senior, recently retired CIA officials, clandestine-service officers, and Cabinet-level officials from the Bush administration, the real story is at once more innocent—Panetta was mistaken; no law was broken—and far more troubling: an inexperienced CIA director, unfamiliar with how his vast, complicated agency works, unable to trust senior officials within his own agency, and desperate to keep his hands clean, screwed up.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
You mean Inspector Clouseau?
I’ve never really understood the logic of being able to appoint any clown to be CIA Director, even someone with absolutely no CIA or “spy” experience of any kind. How can Leon Panetta be “the nation’s top spy” when he doesn’t know the first thing about the CIA?
I can understand that in the early days of Truman, directors had to be appointed since the agency was brand new. But now, I’d think that anyone who wants to be Director of the CIA should have to have been actually IN the CIA, in a fairly high position, in order to be eligible for consideration.
Am I missing something here?
but I thought it didn’t matter that he had not intelligence experience. After all, he was a super manager.
Oh God, we are in so much trouble. I have never been so scared for my family and my nation.
Incompetence in this administration...surprise, surprise , surprise...</sarc>
No one wanted the job.
Regardless, I’m saying that the rules (or lack thereof) that allow a Leon Panetta to be appointed to head a behemoth, complicated and highly sensitive agency that he has no experience in whatsoever...well, that’s just messed up.
The daily beasts eating one of their own beasts. Fits the spirit of Obama’s Health “Care” bill. I’ll bet heavyweight Meg McCain was in on this investigation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.