Leon Panetta tapped by Obama to head CIA

[WilliamPitt]

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/panetta-to-be-named-cia-director/?hp

Thoughts?

[ThomWV]

1. It would be a smash hit around here.

[Cleita]

2. Let the smashing begin. n/t

[ThomWV]

4. Smashing, Bashing, all the same thing, and you may presume it will begin immediately.

[Cleita]

3. Seems like he wants all Washington insiders who know where to wheel

and deal. I think it's a mistake though and I'm sure Obama will see it down the line, hopefully, not before it's too late.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Devil's advocate

and not disagreeing, but a question:

Obama has to staff this huge government with people competent enough to do the job. More to the point, 99.9% of those competent people also have to be Democrats. My question: how many Democrats are out there who know how to run this government?

Bill Clinton's first chief of staff, Mack McLarty, was not a DC insider and had none of the shady insider-y connections we've seen in a lot of Obama's picks. But Mack McLarty was a disaster as Chief of Staff, because he lacked the kind of competence, experience and know-how he absolutely needed for his position.

One doesn't get that know-how without becoming a DC insider; the two travel together.

Obama needs Democrats who know how to run this government. Panetta is such a one. Does this argument make sense?

[Cleita]

16. Sure it does, however, it seems to me that we also need just a touch of

fresh thinking from a couple of outsiders who can question the status quo. It seems this post could have been filled with a strong Democrat, who has police or military experience, but no Washington ties as it seems the agency is corrupt and needs to be cleaned up. But, I can only assess what is going on from what information is coming across my computer screen and that's what it looks like to me.

I think six months from now Obama may wish he had put in a few Washington outsiders and progressives in his government for balance.

[JDPriestly]

43. I have observed that Obama is appointing old-timers to the top

positions, but is also appointing new-comers of a slightly more liberal persuasion to the middle positions. This is a good way to permit inexperienced people with good ideals to learn from pros. It also provides a good balance.

[madrchsod]

5. that makes no sense what so ever

there`s nothing in his past to qualify him to run the cia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Panetta

[JDPriestly]

44. He may be an interim appointment. Perhaps someone is in the wings.

Obama may want some time to get to know the CIA professionals, the insiders in the agency. Panetta is a good person to put in the position of getting to know and judging the character and capacity of those in the agency. Panetta has shown good judgment in the past. He is balanced. Obviously he will take advice and cues from the agency professionals.

Obama is being cautious with this appointment. I think, as usual, Obama has thought this through very carefully. Panetta is above all, a person all players can trust. But you are correct, I suspect that Panetta will not "run" the CIA. He will work with everyone there and, gradually, let Obama know who among those left over from the Bush era can be trusted to "run" the CIA.

It is unfortunate that Obama cannot immediately put a highly qualified professional into that post, but, let's face it, an unknown number of the (in some cases, top level) folks now in the CIA are rotten eggs (apples if you prefer). Panetta will be advising Obama on whom to trust, whom to send to Newcastle, so to speak.

[grantcart]

6. I think it shows that he is putting in a reliable soldier with a clean intelligence slate

would seem to indicate that he wants to exert a lot of presidential influence over the agency.

[mr_hat]

7. Much the same as *'s appointing Porter Goss, imo.

[WilliamPitt]

10. Why do you think so?

Genuine question. I'm not settled on an opinion here yet.

[mr_hat]

18. He'll be the president's inside man, as was Goss.

Too many presidents have been burned by keeping the Agency at arms length or openly fighting with it.

Now, the trend is to quietly wind it down from the inside. For all the talk about the pressing need to get intel on the ground in the world's hot spots, the greater task of recent DCIAs has been political: to limit damage to the Executive by keeping known secrets secret and burying operations through bureaucracy.

[ixion]

8. shifting deck chairs on the Titanic

IMO...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Hopefully to disband it.

One can dream.

[WilliamPitt]

12. Don't bogart.

;)

[NJmaverick]

13. This is a head scratcher. Panetta has no real experience in Intelligence

and at 71 he certainly would qualify as an old dog (learning a new trick).

[Cleita]

17. He wasn't put there for his intelligence experience but his

Washington insider abilities.

[NJmaverick]

20. How will Washington insider ability help him run the nation's number one

intelligence agency?

[Cleita]

24. I don't know. Obama does though so ask him. n/t

[JDPriestly]

46. He'll know how to gather the information on the Bushies in the CIA.

The CIA can be a very dangerous organization to a liberal president. Obama is going to need to identify friend and foe in that organization very quickly. Panetta has lots of experience with people.

Panetta is over 70, as I understand it. While we older folks do not perform some tasks as quickly as we did in our 20s, over our lives some of us have accumulated an useful and broad knowledge of human experience. It stands us in good stead in figuring out what is going on beneath the surface in many situations. Panetta is loyal to his bosses and has nothing to lose by being quite brutal in forming (and voicing) his opinions of his co-workers. He will do a great job at the work that needs to be done -- which is cleaning up the CIA and getting the people there to do the job they are supposed to be doing for the U.S. He is a no-nonsense guy and he won't fall for foolish nonsense, although he may make people working for him think that they are fooling him.

[NJmaverick]

49. I come from the school of thought that says a person put in charge

should have a good understanding of what they are in charge of. I just don't see that to be the case, with Panetta.

[ThomWV]

38. So you don't think it might have something to do with managerial skill?

Serious question. The CIA seems to be out of touch and a strong manager would seem to be a good starting point for cleaning it up.

[Cleita]

42. Possible. I guess we will find out down the line. n/t

[JDPriestly]

45. Panetta has learned a lot of new tricks in his life, and his job

will be to assess the people remaining after Bush reorganized the agency. He will do a top-notch job in the kind of intelligence that Obama needs at this point -- which is in assessing the folks and the operation at the CIA.

[uppityperson]

14. He is wonderful! (snark at me here...)

[uppityperson]

15. He is AWFUL! (snark at me here...)

actually Will, I'll kick to kick and mark for checking back later since lots of people write you your OPs.

[AntiFascist]

19. Where does Panetta stand on....

the use of PROMIS-like software? That's the deep state question I'd like answered. Or is that more of an NSA issue?

[Ichingcarpenter]

21. He's not George Tenet, John Deutch nor General Hayden

Here's a Panetta quote:

"If torture can stop the next terrorist attack, the next suicide bomber, then what's wrong with a little waterboarding or electric shock?

The simple answer is the rule of law."


As COS you know he dealt with the intelligence community under Clinton.

I'm just scared the CIA might have a secret rendition program ready for him...... LOL

[zorahopkins]

22. Abolish The CIA

I hope President Obama uuill direct Mr. Paneta to begin the orderly abolition of this agency that spies on people, kills people, and is very much like the Gestapo.

Uue really do not need an agency like this. It needs to be abolished. Soon.

Note: In protest of the continuing occupation of OUR Uuhite House by the illegal and totally corrupt Bush/Cheney regime of thugs and cronies, I REFUSE to use the letter betuueen "V" and "X". Instead, I use a "double u", as in "Uuhite House".

[WI_DEM]

23. I don't necessarily think of it as a bad appointment

I see some people say he has no experience in that area--but the fact is as the chief of staff to the president of the USA he had a great deal of experience seeing and dealing with top intelligence information.

Prior to that he was a long serving congressman who obviously dealt with security issues.

He is honest and has a good record and I think would do a fine job.

[charlie]

25. I don't think of Nice Guys when I consider the CIA

I usually think of unprincipled partisans like GHWB and Casey, who'll fuck over anybody and everybody to get what they want. Panetta has always been almost unseemly happy and well-liked. In that one way, he's an odd choice.

[Ichingcarpenter]

28. Thugs you want then? Interesting

[charlie]

29. Oh, blow me

That's neither what I said or what I want. It was an observation, officer.

[Ichingcarpenter]

31. forgot the sarcasm notation

sorry

I've worried since John Foster Dulles came to head the CIA
and continued till now with "Taxi to the Darkside"

[charlie]

33. I'm sorry for snapping

Thank you for explaining, please accept my apologies.

[EFerrari]

26. I like Leon Panetta. He did good things for CA. DUer jackpan posted this article

by Panetta in GD:P:

According to the latest polls, two-thirds of the American public believes that torturing suspected terrorists to gain important information is justified in some circumstances. How did we transform from champions of human dignity and individual rights into a nation of armchair torturers? One word: fear.

Fear is blinding, hateful, and vengeful. It makes the end justify the means. And why not? If torture can stop the next terrorist attack, the next suicide bomber, then what's wrong with a little waterboarding or electric shock?

The simple answer is the rule of law. Our Constitution defines the rules that guide our nation. It was drafted by those who looked around the world of the eighteenth century and saw persecution, torture, and other crimes against humanity and believed that America could be better than that. This new nation would recognize that every individual has an inherent right to personal dignity, to justice, to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.

We have preached these values to the world. We have made clear that there are certain lines Americans will not cross because we respect the dignity of every human being. That pledge was written into the oath of office given to every president, "to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution." It's what is supposed to make our leaders different from every tyrant, dictator, or despot. We are sworn to govern by the rule of law, not by brute force.



http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801.panetta.html

[Warren DeMontague]

27. I like Panetta.

Are we supposed to be wailing and gnashing our teeth around this, too? :shrug:

[Autumn]

30. Well he is

a Clinton rehash.It does bother some people.:shrug:

[Warren DeMontague]

36. Eh.

I guess I'm not one of 'em. :shrug:

I actually think the country was run pretty well from 1993-2001, and I think Bill Clinton surrounded himself with some very competent people. Frankly, I would be surprised if large numbers of them didn't end up working for Obama.

Rick Warren bothers me more.

[Ichingcarpenter]

39. Clinton appointed George Tenet and John Deutch

President Clinton pardoned Deutch on his last day in office

nuff said

[Warren DeMontague]

40. I don't agree with 100% of everything Bill Clinton did.

Nevertheless, I still think things were run- overall- a helluva lot better back then. And we're talking about Leon Panetta, here, not John Deutch.

[pinto]

32. Panetta did well here in CA. He's smart, to the point - which may bode him

well in that maze, or not. Smart they know. To the point maybe not so much. It is, after all a spy agency. He's articulate and level headed. I'll lay odds on him doing us well there.

And, his public comments denouncing torture under our name are a breath of fresh air.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

[Ichingcarpenter]

34. Here's a good reason to like him... Dianne Feinstein doesn't like him

http://washingtonindependent.com/23827/dianne-feinstein...

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who’s about to take the reins as chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, doesn’t appear to be too happy with Leon Panetta’s prospective appointment to head the CIA. Here’s what her office just sent me:

“I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director. I know nothing about this, other than what I’ve read,” said Senator Feinstein, who will chair the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in the 111th Congress.

“My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.”






Her intelligence says a lot:

SHE:

Voted for the war on Iraq

Voted in committee for FISA amendment to grant retroactive immunity to telecoms companies

Voted for this in the Senate Intelligence (!) Committee and then voted to end debate on the amendment foreclosing promised filibusters by more principled Democrats.

Voted to confirm Michael Mukasey as Attorney General

Mr. Mukasey wouldn't provide a straight answer on water-boarding then (or even now)! Quisling Feinstein justified her vote for Mr. Mukasey on the grounds that any other nominee might be even worse.

Voted to confirm Condoleeza Rice as Sec. of State

This despite Ms. Rice's dismal performance as Director of the NSA in the previous 4-years. Ms. Feinstein justified her vote for the incompetent Ms. Rice on the grounds of personal acquaintance with Ms. Rice.

Voted to confirm Michael Hayden as Director of the CIA

This despite Mr. Hayden having previously architected, implemented, and run the program for NSA's illegal wire-tapping of American citizens.

[JNelson6563]

35. I will watch and wait.

Could be interesting.

Julie

[goforit]

37. How connected to GHWBush and Nixon is he???? I know Clinton had him, but...

[bigtree]

41. that will leave it to Dennis Blair (as Intelligence Dir.) to formulate actual policy

. . . and Panetta will presumably manage, direct, and promote that policy from CIA (originated, of course, from Obama's own initiative)



Obama's new intelligence czar (Dennis Blair)

January 06, 2009
Article from: Agence France-Presse

PRESIDENT-ELECT Barack Obama's chosen intelligence czar will have to juggle a number of ticking timebombs while riding herd over 16 often fractious intelligence agencies, experts say.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24878572-26397,00.html

[NNN0LHI]

47. I have no problem with this pick

[hunter]

48. It's gonna be an Ambien & Vodka night for some of the neocon rot at the CIA.

Hold your noses and put on your wading boots and goggles. The right wing think tanks ain't gonna hold -- them cesspools are gonna blow!

Personally, I'm staying far, far away from Stanford. The toxic flaming flailing corpse of Herbert Hoover could poke your eye out.

[Orsino]

50. Not very impressive...

...but if Obama is convinced that Panetta is on board with the needed approach, I guess it makes sense.