Negroponte is a disaster. Doesn't say much for Bush's selection process for a career diplomat with no direct experience in intelligence matters to have been selected for that position. Goss was trying to make the analysts pull overseas tours of duty and get closer to the operators and the analysts went squealing like stuck pigs to Negroponte--and it worked.
The DNI was a poor solution to the problem from the start. Government bureaucracies don't solve problems, they magnify them. That is what has happened here.
I'm wondering if the CIA has the "the drive-by media" on a hook? There's a chasm separating the public perception of Bush and the things Bush has done;he's a moderate in fact, but is depicted as a neanderthal conservative, he's conducted the war on terror with restraint, but he's depicted as Attilla the Hun, etc.
The media is easy to lead around: for the most part they are narcisistic, fawning, treacherous little careerists looking for a scoop. Manage them like pigeons. Throw some parties, let them rub elbows with the big shots, drop one an exclusive from time to time, and you'll have them eating out of your hand.
Clinton, if he succeeded at anything, succeeded here. He knew the tricks. So would the CIA; it's they're business.
The CIA has poisoned the water and it's going to take a lot to fix.
Negroponte was Reagan's top diplomat in Central American. But he was more than a diplomat as the left knows.
He was Reagan's point man for the funding and training of the Contras working directly with the CIA.
He knows where all the dead bodies are buried in C.A. and the left hates it for him.
This article sounds like some much disinformation.