Replies

Here's something I find interesting, from the link I posted above. General Hayden speaks in bureaucratese but I think he's been doing a lot of important things. Near the end of this briefing he asserts that, in the spirit of Goldwater-Nichols (legislation in the 80s that established the joint military commands), it is also important in the newly unified intel community that people see that major promotions occur from within the group of analysts and officers devoted to joint 'commands' (such as under the DNI in this example). Otherwise, all the separate tubs will continue to be separate and there will be reluctance of the best people to serve on the joint staffs outside of legacy agencies.

This is Hayden speaking, of course, not Negroponte. But what better way for Pres. Bush and DNI Negroponte to show all of the intel agencies that the DNI's office is the happening place than for someone like Hayden to go on to be Director of CIA???? Just speculation, of course, but it's making sense to me......
-----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.dni.gov/speeches/20050629_speech.htm

"General Hayden: Culture, okay so what is it? You move impediments to collaboration. The whole goal is collaboration, that's one. Number two, you incentivize collaboration. There's a wonderful sentence in Goldwater/Nichols, don't take this to the bank, we're a different kind of community, but a wonderful sentence in Goldwater/Nichols. I think it's the most powerful sentence in the entire law. "Promotion rates of officers on the Joint Staff shall be equal to or greater than the promotion rates of officers on the military headquarters staffs." Turn the word over. What like sentence or sentences are there to our community that incentivize this more communal experience?"

Haden seems like a prime candidate, certainly, but I've always believed in Goss. It's a niggling thing, this sudden "resignation.".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://macsmind.blogspot.com/

Mission Accomplished

No matter what you hear, Goss came, he saw, he conquered. This isn't a "staff change", it has nothing to do with Rove. It was understood when he came in what he was coming in for. He did what he came to do.

He swept, now others will collect the dust.

If the rogues thought Goss was a ball-buster, they haven't seen anything yet, as the CIA will most likely now come directly under the DNI, John Negroponte.

Let the fun begin.

UPDATE: Refence the DNI note above: Via The Corner's Katherine Lopez, quoting a Time magazine article:

"It's more than a bureaucratic battle. Ever since John Negroponte was appointed Director of National Intelligence a year ago and given the task of coordinating the nation's myriad spy agencies, he has been diluting the power and prestige of the best known of them all, the Central Intelligence Agency. From day one, he supplanted the CIA Director as the President's principal intelligence adviser, in charge of George W. Bush's daily briefing. Other changes followed, all originating in the law that created the DNI — and all traumatic for CIA fans. But now, in a little noticed move, Negroponte is signaling that he is moving still more responsibility from the CIA to his own office, including control over the analysis of terrorist groups and threats...."

Former Spook weighs in:

"What disturbs me about the Goss resignation is the possibility that internal battles may have worn down the director, and eventually convinced him to throw in the towel. It's no secret that Goss has been fighting pitched battles against staffers who oppose Bush Administration policies, and the new management team at the CIA. Goss recently fired CIA officer Mary McCarthy for unauthorized contacts with the press, and there are hints that other agency staffers may be implicated as well. But earlier this week, the CIA launched an investigation of the agency's #3 official--a Goss appointee--in connection with the bribery scandal that sent former Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham to federal prison. Given the timing--and announcement--of the inquiry, there was some belief that the probe was something of a "counter-attack" by agency's anti-administration cabal."

No doubt. Also, I have been told that this wasn't "spur of the moment", but in the works for a while. Again, Porter did what the came to do, he was never considered "long term". As to the indications of other firings and prosecutions, they are forth coming for both the working and retired.

UPDATE II: jpod at the Corner: "I doubt there's a big scandal here, if only because the president chose to appear with Goss to announce the resignation. If Goss were somehow implicated in matters relating to Duke Cunningham, say, there's no way on earth Bush would have made such a friendly show of his departure. Seems more likely to me that there was some kind of showdown between Goss and Negroponte and Negroponte said, "Either he goes or I go," and there Goss went."

Agreed. So calm down people.

PS: I failed to mention of the rifts between Goss and Negroponte - that's true, they didn't exchange Valentines, but it's NOT the reason.

UPDATE III: Via the comments, Tim Russert stated on NBC News that the agency had been looking over resumes for weeks. So much for "spur of the moment".

Another interesting theory although I can't get a confirmation on it, that Porter may be heading out to run for the Senate in Florida - thus bumping the resistant Katherine Harris. Florida's his home, makes sense, but again, he came in to do what he did and now that job is finished.

Won't stop some people from shaking the "Bush".....

UPDATE IV: Via Fox news quoting a source on the Senate Intelligence Committee:

"One senior Democratic aide on the Senate Intelligence Committee told FOX News that "there were rumblings" about his departure. Committee staffers were told that the director of national intelligence, John Negroponte, was "not happy" with Goss. Negroponte was named to his position in April of 2005 and took over some of Goss' duties, such as briefing the president every morning; Goss also no longer sat atop the 16 intelligence agencies.

When Bush nominated Goss to head the CIA in August 2004, the president said he would rely on the advice of the CIA officer-turned-politician on intelligence reform issues.

One source told FOX news that Goss was was reacting to Bush's desire to know who was going to leave, sooner rather than later, when he made his decision. This source said Goss wanted to retire three-and-a-half years ago but was convinced to run for Congress again, then convinced to take over at CIA. Some aren't reading into the resignation any more than that."