Posted on 08/24/2009 8:45:10 AM PDT by mojito
A "profanity-laced screaming match" at the White House involving CIA Director Leon Panetta, and the expected release today of another damning internal investigation, has administration officials worrying about the direction of its newly-appoint intelligence team, current and former senior intelligence officials tell ABC News.com.
Amid reports that Panetta had threatened to quit just seven months after taking over at the spy agency, other insiders tell ABCNews.com that senior White House staff members are already discussing a possible shake-up of top national security officials.
"You can expect a larger than normal turnover in the next year," a senior adviser to Obama on intelligence matters told ABCNews.com.
Since 9/11, the CIA has had five directors or acting directors.
A White House spokesperson, Denis McDonough, said reports that Panetta had threatened to quit and that the White House was seeking a replacement were "inaccurate."
According to intelligence officials, Panetta erupted in a tirade last month during a meeting with a senior White House staff member. Panetta was reportedly upset over plans by Attorney General Eric Holder to open a criminal investigation of allegations that CIA officers broke the law in carrying out certain interrogation techniques that President Obama has termed "torture."
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Consider this...Panetta was not the first, second or third choices for the CIA job. It took them a long while because people found problems with candidate one...and I think both the second and third came to a point of just saying “no”. So Panetta was asked to just fill in. I don’t think the White House or Panetta aimed for this to be more than twelve to eighteen months.
Lets admit this....Panetta has zero talent or skill at this entire business. It probably took alot o discussions and agreements to get him to sign on and agree to this job that he doesn’t really want. He probably discussed the chances of this investigation business and was probably assured that the president would not allow it to go to this degree. Obviously, this gentleman’s understanding didn’t hold up.
What happens now? Panetta now has no reason to stay on and I would imagine that he will announce his “retirement” to occur this next week...after the President returns from the vacation.
So lets go to what happens within the CIA. Almost every single employee will take this as a threat to themselves. The management will tell them all that they are safe, and to just shut up.
So the AG and his investigators arrive....to find CIA guys smiling. No one cooperates with them and claims whatever they know....is classified and the AG doesn’t have a need to know (this drilled into every military and CIA analyst from day one).
As days go by....CIA operations overseas start to deteriorate and operatives now start to question everything of their bosses. Who authorized this mission? What director approved it? What was the original intent? Who is paying for what? CIA management starts to meet and discuss the mess. The KGB monitoring them...starts to laugh and report this mess daily back to Moscow.
So the spring of 2011 comes...the Republicans have taken back the house (but not the Senate). They start requesting the AG to meet with them. They start to get confrontational over the mess. No individual from the CIA is ever brought into court because the AG eventually offers his resignation.
You also have to consider this. Eric Holder may very well be the Democratic nominee for senator in Illinois. So this entire mess could be dropped by February as he runs out of steam and decides to move on.
“Amid reports that Panetta had threatened to quit just seven months after taking over at the spy agency, other insiders tell ABCNews.com that senior White House staff members are already discussing a possible shake-up of top national security officials.”
Yes,indeed! The BO WH needs more muzzie friendly folks running our national security!
I see your point. There are a few states that guard freedom. My state for instance,Texas, for now intends to hold the feds at bay.
But sadly illegals and Hispanics are rapidly trying to take control. We probably have less than 2 years to cement any firm independence we can.
Other states that value freedom often don’t offer enough opportunity.
Still it is a start and we should act
But with the nmedia feeding the masses the obama koolaid, that a nanny state is desirable.
The CIA wanted a left wing administration.
They got it.
Aren’t Panetta and Hillary close? I can see mutiny ahead.
“I guess Panetta, at some level, actually believes in his country.”
Maybe. The more I see Hussein, the more I believe that being an American is a state of mind. Even if Hussein had been born in the USA, which he wasn’t, he still wouldn’t be an American.
Don't forget to add 'muslim' to that mix...
Panetta was a reliable stooge for the Clintons, but it looks like Obama’s ruthless Gestapo tactics against Bush are gagging even him.
OK, I’m thinking r9etb is probably right (don’t know how I didn’t see it before...duh) but I also thought of this reason: This kerfuffle will get health care off the front page. Moreover, as Limbaugh pointed out today, these guys all think America agrees with them on treatment of terrorists, so this may be a hamhanded effort to boost Zero’s approval ratings.
I am afraid that is wishful thinking.
The Dems have over 40 more members in the House than the Republicans.
I am sure we will gain quite a few seats but 40 is a pretty high number to make up in one election.
“Just the same...I respect him very much if the above story is true.”
Well,...how in the world is a CIA director supposed to keep up morale in an agency when the Attorney General, with a liberal/socialist agenda wants to try and prosecute interrogators that were in a desperate situation to try and find out what the heck was happening in our country in regards to terrorist acts.
We can’t have it both ways. Either we give great latitutde and interrogate and in some cases kill the terrorists, or we let them kill us. What’s it gonna be Eric? Unbelievable. People tend to forget the times we were living in. Now they want to play monday morning political quarterbacking. It was a unique time, in very harried circumstances.
Hell, we might as well go back and prosecute Sandy Burglar for stealing and destroying national secrets in his socks that were directly related to Clinton’s decision-making in regard to Osama bin Laden. How about prosecuting THAT Eric??
obama work with the CIA and help America in some way? NEVER!!!!
Just like Carter
It's not impossible...the dims did it in 2 elections and the general public was NOT as unhappy and upset as they are now!
After Clinton’s first two years, and the HillaryCare attempt, the Dems lost over 50 seats... and the Clintons didn’t cut Social Security payments to the elderly (mega-voters).
It is a tall order.
BTW, what do you teach?
I guess of upi wpont bow to the Dictator you are history?
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.