Log in or Sign up

Obamas Intelligence Brief Scandal

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ScienceRocks, Oct 14, 2012.

Page 1 of 3

Oct 14, 2012 #1

Offline
ScienceRocks Blue dog all the way!

Joined:

Mar 16, 2010

Messages:

55,253

Thanks Received:

5,337

Trophy Points:

1,885

Location:

The Good insane United states of America

Ratings:

+20,424

Obamas Intelligence Brief Scandal
The Western Center for Journalism ^ | OCTOBER 10, 2012 | Paul G. Kengor

Obama's Intelligence Brief Scandal

The last few weeks have produced many intriguing political moments, but none as shocking as the revelation that President Obama has been absent from the vast majority of his daily intelligence briefings.

According to a study by the Government Accountability Institute, Obama failed to attend a single Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) in the week leading up to the recent anniversary of 9/11 and the chaos that erupted in the Arab world. The mere fact that we were approaching 9/11 was a crucial enough reason to attend not one but all the briefings. President Obama attended none.

Worse, this is apparently nothing new. Obama attended only 43.8 percent of his Daily Briefs in the first 1,225 days of his administration. For this year, he attended a little over a third.

This is stunning, and theres no excuse for it.

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen, who worked for President George W. Bush, pressed NSC spokesman Tommy Vietor for an explanation. Thiessen reported:

Vietor did not dispute the numbers, but said the fact that the president, during a time of war, does not attend his daily intelligence meeting on a daily basis is not particularly interesting or useful. He says that the president reads his PDB every day, and he disagreed with the suggestion that there is any difference whatsoever between simply reading the briefing book and having an interactive discussion of its contents with top national security and intelligence officials where the president can probe assumptions and ask questions. I actually dont agree at all, Vietor told me in an e-mail. The president gets the information he needs from the intelligence community each day.

Thats simply the White House covering for the president.

Similarly, White House spokesman Jay Carney dismissed the PDB charge as hilarious. No, no, said Carney, the president gets it every day. By it, Carney was apparently talking about the intelligence briefing papers, not the actual meetings.

Pro-Obama journalists happily accepted Carneys explanation. CNN posted Carneys comments under a photo of a pensive Obama sitting at an intelligence briefing.

Sorry, but, once again, theres no excuse for this, especially in the post-9/11 world. George W. Bush not only didnt miss the PDB but actually expanded it to six meetings per week.

Consider, too, the case of Ronald Reagan, who liberals, ironically, portrayed as an uninformed idiot who didnt pay attention in meetings or read anything.

Reagan, in fact, attended the daily intelligence briefing. I could lay this out at length, but here Ill offer just two Reagan sources, both still living, who can speak to this:

One source is Herb Meyer, special assistant to CIA director Bill Casey in the 1980s. Meyer told me: Of course Reagan attended all those daily briefings. And after the briefers returned to CIA headquarters, Bill [Casey] would meet with them just to be sure the president (and Haig & Weinberger) got answers to whatever questions they may have had. In short, it was a veryveryserious business.

Another source is Bill Clark. Clark was Ronald Reagans right-hand man in foreign policy. As his biographer, I know Clark well. He is 80 years old and lives in California. Clark told me this about Reagan and the PDB:

Bill Casey would, by courier, send the Presidents Daily Brief each morning at about 5:00 a.m. to our war room downstairs in our [National] Security Council. It would be delivered to the president in his residence before he came over [by 7:00 a.m.]. Hed write questions all over the margins about things that werent clear in the briefing. And, of course, the agency [CIA] would come down with further explanations.

Clark recalls how Reagan craved that regular morning update. He would read it, and then they would meet. Reagan ate up these briefings. He asked questions of his advisers. He probed for ideas. Reagan attended the briefings and used them as presidents should.

When Reagan finished his presidency, after two terms, genuine freedom and democracy were surging all over the communist world.

As for President Obama, if hes in the process of finishing his presidency, after one term, hes facing a surge of radical Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East. Can any of that be blamed on Obamas failure to attend these routine briefings? Maybe, maybe not, but it certainly cant help.

In fact, as Marc Theissen and the Government Accountability Institute have noted in follow-up stories, Obama is now suddenly attending his daily briefing. Thats no doubt a response to political criticism. But could it beon the heels of the eruptions in Libya and Egypt, which Obama initially blamed not on pre-meditated terrorism but a videothat maybe President Obama feels like he might have been missing something?
Click to expand...
Oct 14, 2012 #2

Offline
ScienceRocks Blue dog all the way!

Joined:

Mar 16, 2010

Messages:

55,253

Thanks Received:

5,337

Trophy Points:

1,885

Location:

The Good insane United states of America

Ratings:

+20,424
Oct 14, 2012 #3

Offline
naturegirl Silver Member

Joined:

Aug 9, 2011

Messages:

4,416

Thanks Received:

862

Trophy Points:

98

Location:

NW Georgia

Ratings:

+862

So this explains in detail how Obama and Biden didn't know about the threats in Benghazi. Makes perfect sense. If you don't have time for the briefings, you probably don't know what's going on.
Oct 14, 2012 #4

Offline
emptystep VIP Member

Joined:

Jul 17, 2012

Messages:

3,654

Thanks Received:

220

Trophy Points:

83

Ratings:

+221
Do you honestly believe the misrepresentations you post? Are you stupid or malicious? Do you give a shit about the issues and the future of the country or are you just another example of republican scum?
- Thank You! x 1
Oct 14, 2012 #5

Offline
naturegirl Silver Member

Joined:

Aug 9, 2011

Messages:

4,416

Thanks Received:

862

Trophy Points:

98

Location:

NW Georgia

Ratings:

+862
emptystep said: ↑

Do you honestly believe the misrepresentations you post? Are you stupid or malicious? Do you give a shit about the issues and the future of the country or are you just another example of republican scum?
Click to expand...

Ahhh, I see. You didn't like the message so let's just attack the messenger.

You would think the President of the US would be a little more concerned about the future of this country and the Americans vulnerable on foreign soil.
- Thank You! x 1
Oct 14, 2012 #6

Offline
gallantwarrior Gold Member

Joined:

Jul 25, 2011

Messages:

20,766

Thanks Received:

4,260

Trophy Points:

280

Location:

On my own 200 acres of the Frozen North

Ratings:

+8,743

The article mentioned that Reagan, among sundry other presidents, considered the daily briefings to be "serious business". Therein lies a very fundamental difference between those other presidents and Obama. Obama doesn't take the job seriously, never has, never will. He hasn't stopped campaigning since he started in '08. He is a capable campaigner-in-chief, though.
Oct 14, 2012 #7

Offline
Rozman Gold Member Supporting Member

Joined:

Sep 18, 2009

Messages:

16,680

Thanks Received:

3,077

Trophy Points:

290

Location:

Brooklyn,NY

Ratings:

+6,781
He was busy getting ready to do the talk show circuit
and working on his comedy routine when he does his schtick for
his followers.Like his hilarious "You didn't build that" speech...
That's a classic....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=192oEC5TX_Q]Obama: If you've been successful you didn't get there on your own - YouTube[/ame]
- Thank You! x 1
Oct 14, 2012 #8

Offline
occupied Gold Member

Joined:

Nov 8, 2011

Messages:

16,979

Thanks Received:

2,318

Trophy Points:

280

Ratings:

+6,197

Great example of republicans hoping that Romney can ride the corpse of our ambassador into the white house.
Oct 14, 2012 #9

Offline
gallantwarrior Gold Member

Joined:

Jul 25, 2011

Messages:

20,766

Thanks Received:

4,260

Trophy Points:

280

Location:

On my own 200 acres of the Frozen North

Ratings:

+8,743
No. A better example would be people concerned that the man currently occupying the position is either incapable of doing or unwilling to do the job he was hired to do.
- Thank You! x 1
Oct 14, 2012 #10

Offline
ScienceRocks Blue dog all the way!

Joined:

Mar 16, 2010

Messages:

55,253

Thanks Received:

5,337

Trophy Points:

1,885

Location:

The Good insane United states of America

Ratings:

+20,424

occupied said: ↑

Great example of republicans hoping that Romney can ride the corpse of our ambassador into the white house.
Click to expand...

I'll criticize the living hell out of Romney, but you seem to be blinded to everything Obama does that's wrong.

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 1 of 3

Share This Page

Active Topics

Not a big deal, but it does...
nat4900 posted Jul 21, 2017 at 3:03 PM
Who is the one person most...
Bassman007 posted Jul 21, 2017 at 3:01 PM
Is A Great Race War Coming?
MikeK posted Jul 21, 2017 at 3:01 PM
The value of polls....Hillary...
Bassman007 posted Jul 21, 2017 at 2:58 PM
Europe committing SUICIDE by...
USApatriotz posted Jul 21, 2017 at 2:57 PM
The Day Of The Long Knives!...
Steve_McGarrett posted Jul 21, 2017 at 2:45 PM
So if Trump pardons everybuddy...
bendog posted Jul 21, 2017 at 2:28 PM
Food Products That I Would Not...
TheProgressivePatriot posted Jul 21, 2017 at 2:16 PM

Loading...

Search