If this is true, shouldn’t Director of National Intelligence James Clapper be fired?
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) on Wednesday told the local CBS station in San Francisco that Obama initially called the attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three Americans an “act of terror” in the days after the Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. She suggested the administration initially linked the attack to an anti-Islam video based on the assessment of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
Clapper — a “very good individual” according to Feinstein — “put out some speaking points on the initial intelligence assessment,” she said. “I think that was possibly a mistake.”
Possibly a mistake?
Let’s go back and review the possible origins of the movie meme. US intelligence intercepted communications among al Qaeda, in which the terrorists said they were going to go ahead with the Benghazi attack and use the movie protests in Cairo and elsewhere as cover. That intercept itself proved that the attack was mounted by terrorists, and that the movie was a pre-text. The Obama administration seized on the mention of the movie and played it up into a central role. That decision was political: An al Qaeda attack exposed a core Obama message on terrorism as false.
Clapper’s performance as DNI has not been a strong one. In addition to this “possible mistake,” he described the Muslim Brotherhood as a “mostly secular” organization as that group rose to power in Egypt. We can debate why Clapper might believe and say that, but the fact is, he is tragically wrong. The Muslim Brotherhood is the font of Islamist doctrine and ideology. It gave rise to al Qaeda, and now that al Qaeda’s commander is an Egyptian alum of the Muslim Brotherhood, there is every chance in the world that Egypt and al Qaeda will work more closely together now than ever.
If the Director of National Intelligence does not see this, if he really believed that the Benghazi attack resulted from a movie, he has no business remaining in his position for another second. His ignorance is a threat to the nation.
On the other hand, Clapper could have been selling the movie meme for political reasons to assist the Obama campaign. If that’s the case then he still needs to be removed, and the position of Director of National Intelligence revisited. The DNI position stovepipes the intelligence that presidents receive (when they’re attending their Presidential Daily Briefings, anyway), and for that reason alone the DNI was always a bad idea. There was always a risk that it would become politicized. Clapper’s performance indicates that it has.
More: Here is video of Feinstein’s remarks. She says security was “inadequate” and then plays forward the new Obama spin, that he actually did call Benghazi “terrorism” on Sept 12. Mission accomplished, Candy Crowley!
It now seems that every single person on the planet was knowingly conspiring to keep POTUS from discovering the truth. We have to circle the wagons for the poor, dope-addled man. He may be bent on destroying the country, but he’s our leader and he deserves our support.
I recently retired from the IC and have worked directly for Lt Gen Clapper. I am sure this is a coordinated effort by the White House to back up THE Vice President’s assertion that the IC provided “faulty” intelligence to the President. The DNI should resign in protest to the attempted scapegoating of IC.
Let me assure you that Lt Gen Clapper never believed that the MB was secular. He tends to trust his staff to give him the right material for testimony. My guess is that John Brennan or more likely, one of his staffers, inserted that line Into his testimony and his MA or the Deputy Director for Intelligence Integration failed to properly vett that assertion. Lt Gen Clapper’s predecessor in the Defense Department personally reviewed this kind of testimony and would not hesitate to call the source on the carpet if it didn’t pass the laugh test.
It smells like what happens when someone inside tries to construct a sanitized version for public consumption.
That of course is the charitable version, rather than believing they were all that confused and ignorant for real.
Even so, tdiinva, I’m not sure what to make of your comments re Clapper, other than he made a mess of things, he is responsible for his staffers, no matter what kind of political hacks they are that he has to deal with, not to mention that he is responsible for the words that come out of his own mouth or are distributed over his signature. If the politics of the situation are getting the better of him, well, that happens and it’s not pretty.
I also don’t know *quite* what to make of *any* statement by my Senatress Feinstein, who apparently lives in a crypt about 363 days a year, then pops out on occassion to give what sounds like an informed and objective opinion on some security matter, but she doesn’t hang around to argue it, she vanishes and we get six more weeks of gibberish. My other Senatress Boxer shows up less often and makes less sense when she does. Great stuff, and all a part of the Obamanation.
While I agree that the Captain is responsible for the operation of his ship I suspect you do not understand that senior decision-makers have to prioritize their very busy schedules. The annual testimony before the Intelligence Committees is routine and not something that a person with Clapper interests is going to spend a lot time going over what the staff has written for him. He trusts his staff and this characteristic makes him a excellent person to work for. If his staff lets him down then of course he has to bear the responsibility. His predecessor at DoD was not an easy person to work for. He didn’t’ trust his staff. He also got into some serious difficulties as well. Every senior looks bad at something during their tour of duty.
No one, and I mean no one, treats testimony before any congressional committee as “routine”.
The idea that a low level staffer wrote this, that he and his Deputy/Chief of Staff didn’t preview it, and that he read it verbatim without thinking about it is laughable. Flag/General Officers, retired or active, do not do that. Otherwise they don’t make it to Flag/General rank.
I completely get that he is being positioned under the wheels of the bus. Just don’t try to make me believe “he read what was in front of him.”
You are wrong. I know all the people involved in the writing and review of this testimony. I reviewed part of it myself and provided comments some of which were accepted. This is an annual show and tell event in an open hearing . The real stuff gets discussed closed session. I can assure you that Clapper just read the testimony and relied on the Q&S provided by his senior staff.
Was it Margaret Thatcher who said “they will run out of fingers to point soon enough”?