{"id":110713,"date":"2017-11-30T15:32:00","date_gmt":"2017-11-30T15:32:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2023-01-08T11:03:16","modified_gmt":"2023-01-08T11:03:16","slug":"throw-clapper-under-bus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/2017\/11\/30\/throw-clapper-under-bus\/","title":{"rendered":"Throw Clapper Under the Bus"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div><h3 class=\"post-title entry-title\" itemprop=\"name\"><\/h3>\n<div class=\"post-header\"> <\/div>\n<p>Tim Cavanaugh said it best at <i>National Review<\/i>: if President Obama really believes what he said about James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence needs to be fired. <\/p>\n<p>For member of the low-information crowd, the Commander-in-Chief gave his  intelligence chief a less-than-rousing endorsement in an interview with  <i>60 Minutes<\/i>, telling Steve Kroft:<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">\u201cI think our head of the intelligence  community Jim Clapper has acknowledged that they underestimated what had  been taking place in Syria,\u201d the president told Steve Croft. When Croft  went on to note that Clapper had also mentioned the failure of the \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.cia.gov\/about-cia\/eo12333.html#1.4\">intelligence community<\/a>\u201d  (a catch-all term for the 17 intelligence agencies that are publicly  known, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation, and the intelligence services maintained by such varied  departments as Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security) to get an  accurate measure of the Iraqi army\u2019s ability to fight, Obama responded  \u201cThat\u2019s true. That\u2019s absolutely true.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">In other words, Mr. Clapper, a retired  Air Force Lieutenant General who has run two major intel organizations  (the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial  Intelligence Agency) and served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for  Intelligence, among other achievements, has presided over a major  intelligence failure that has jeopardized national security.&nbsp; There is a  growing consensus among intel professionals that ISIS fighters not only  control vast swaths of Syria and Iraq, they are also present on  American soil, meaning that attacks against the homeland are a matter of  &#8220;if&#8221; and not &#8220;when.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">So why does Jim Clapper still have a job?<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Part of the answer is rooted in  history.&nbsp; Remarkably, few senior intelligence officers have been sacked,  despite routine failures by our Intelligence Community over the past 75  years.&nbsp; When the Japanese surprised our forces at Pearl Harbor in 191,  the Pacific Fleet intelligence officer, Commander Edwin Layton, kept his  job, and continued his climb in the Navy hierarchy, eventually retiring  as a Rear Admiral.&nbsp; The same held true for Commander Joseph Rochefort,  who ran the communications intercept and code-breaking operation in  Hawaii, and senior leaders at the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) in  Washington. &nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Similar patterns followed other intel  debacles, including China&#8217;s entry into the Korean War (1950); the Tet  Offensive in Vietnam (1968), the Yom Kippur War (1973), the Iranian  Revolution (1979) and of course, the 9-11 attacks.&nbsp; In most cases, the  intel community completely missed the unfolding events and we were  caught flat-footed.&nbsp; Literally thousands of Americans paid for these  mistakes with their lives.&nbsp; But despite the hand-wringing and  blue-ribbon commissions that followed many of the intel catastrophes,  few senior spooks lost their jobs. &nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">In some cases, it was deemed unwise to  change intel leadership as the country plunged into conflict, or faced a  major foreign policy crisis.&nbsp; After 9-11, President George W. Bush made  a conscious decision to keep CIA Director George Tenet on the job,  despite public and Congressional clamor for his scalp. Mr. Bush believed  that forcing Tenet out would leave the intelligence community  leaderless as the nation entered a full-fledged war with Islamic  terrorists.&nbsp; In those days, the CIA Director also served as head of the  nation&#8217;s intel apparatus, so the president&#8217;s concerns were not  unfounded. &nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">But in other situations, it&#8217;s convenient  to keep the spooks as a scapegoat, and that seems to be the case with  Mr. Obama.&nbsp; When NSA turncoat Edward Snowden revealed the extent of U.S.  collection efforts, the commander-in-chief sought to distance himself  from the scandal, noting his skepticism about such programs as a  candidate for the presidency.&nbsp; Of course, the fact that he approved  those efforts&#8211;and expanded them&#8211;from the Oval Office is a completely  different matter, something that angry intel officials pointed out as  the Snowden affair mushroomed into a major controversy.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\"><br \/><\/span><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">The spooks also pushed back earlier this  year, when members of Mr. Obama&#8217;s national security team tried to blame  them for failing to detect Russia&#8217;s occupation of Crimea.&nbsp; As Shane  Harris writes at <a href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicy.com\/articles\/2014\/09\/29\/obamas_islamic_state_blame_game?utm_source=Sailthru&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_term=%2ASituation%20Report&amp;utm_campaign=SitRep0930\"><i>Foreign Policy<\/i><\/a>: &nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">The  spies, said a senior U.S. official, had &#8220;warned that that the region was  a flashpoint for a possible military conflict and that the Russians  were preparing military assets for possible deployment to Ukraine&#8221;  before the first of Putin&#8217;s shock troops stepped foot in the country.  U.S. spies have been on edge ever since, which helps explain why they  fought back so fiercely when the White House seemed to be blaming them  for not predicting the success of the Islamic State.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Indeed,  the notion that our intel agencies missed the rise of ISIS strains  credulity.&nbsp; There were plenty of warnings in recent months, including  the testimony of Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, then-Director of the  Defense Intelligence Agency: &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">In February, [Flynn] presented the Senate Armed Services Committee with his agency&#8217;s &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.armed-services.senate.gov\/imo\/media\/doc\/Flynn_02-11-14.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">annual threat assessment<\/a>.&#8221;  The assessment had a prominent warning about the Islamic State: The  group &#8220;probably will attempt to take territory in Iraq and Syria to  exhibit its strength in 2014, as demonstrated recently in Ramadi and  Fallujah, and the group&#8217;s ability to concurrently maintain multiple safe  havens in Syria,&#8221; Flynn said in his prepared remarks. &nbsp; <\/span><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">[snip]<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">After the Islamic State captured Mosul and Tikrit, U.S. intelligence officials <a href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicy.com\/articles\/2014\/06\/12\/jihadist_gains_in_iraq_blindside_american_spies\">pushed back hard<\/a> against the suggestion that they&#8217;d been blindsided. Analysts had  &#8220;closely tracked&#8221; the group and its predecessor organizations for years,  said one senior U.S. intelligence official. &#8220;[D]uring the past year,  [analysts] routinely provided strategic warning of ISIL&#8217;s growing  strength in Iraq and increasing threat to Iraq&#8217;s stability,&#8221; the  official said.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">General  Flynn, widely regarded as one of the most effective directors in recent  DIA history, was forced into retirement in August.&nbsp; His sins?&nbsp; Openly  challenging the Obama Administration narrative that Al Qaida&#8217;s brand of  extremism died with Osama bin Laden in 2010, and pointing out the White  House&#8217;s preferred strategy of killing terrorists with drones really  isn&#8217;t a strategy.&nbsp; A replacement for General Flynn has yet to be named.&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Which  brings us to the real reason that Mr. Clapper is still gainfully  employed.&nbsp; As a senior intelligence officer for almost 40 years, Clapper  has fought his share of bureaucratic wars and felt it was necessary to  fall on his sword (again).&nbsp; His motive is probably rooted in an effort  to preserve intel programs and resources considered vital to the  nation&#8217;s security.&nbsp; Take another round for the White House, and get  another plus-up in the intel budget, and secure approval&#8211;or renewal&#8211;of  controversial collection programs. &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">But  serving as the President&#8217;s fall guy for the crisis du jour also entails  organizational risks.&nbsp; The push back from current and former intel  officials reflects a community that is fed up with the administration  blame game and is quite willing to leak information that depicts a White  House disinterested in reading intel assessments while the world burns.  &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">We&#8217;ve  been down this road countless times before.&nbsp; One reason that Commanders  Layton and Rochefort kept their jobs after Pearl Harbor is that key  players in the Navy chain&#8211;most notably their boss, Admiral Chester  Nimitz, realized that his intel officers were operating at a  disadvantage.&nbsp; In the days before the Japanese attack, they were denied  critical intel from decoded Japanese diplomatic traffic (which would  have made enemy military intentions more clear), and both were prevented  from sharing their own decrypts with Nimitz&#8217;s predecessor, Admiral  Husband Kimmel, and his Army counterpart, Lieutenant General Walter  Short. &nbsp; These realities have fueled decades of conspiracy theories  about FDR &#8220;inviting&#8221; an attack on Pearl Harbor, while keeping his  operational commanders in the dark.&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">These  days, the administration seems to be feigning ignorance, but that excuse  doesn&#8217;t pass muster.&nbsp; By all accounts, Mr. Obama was warned about the  rise of ISIS and chose to disregard his intelligence assessments.&nbsp; With  no re-election to fret over, and a war-weary public, perhaps the  President calculated he would never be held accountable and if there was  a minor kerfuffle, Mr. Clapper would readily take the blame.&nbsp; Perhaps  that&#8217;s why the DNI still has a job, and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.breitbart.com\/Big-Peace\/2014\/09\/29\/Report-Obama-Has-Missed-Over-Half-His-Second-Term-Daily-Intel-Briefings\">President Obama skips almost 60% of his daily intelligence briefs, according to the Government Accountability Office<\/a>. &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">ISIS  has (rightly) been described as a cancer, one that is spreading to our  own shores.&nbsp; When the terror Army unleashes its fury in an American  city, it will be interesting to see if Mr. Obama tries to blame his  DNI&#8211;again&#8211;and if the public actually demands presidential  accountability. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Tim Cavanaugh said it best at National Review: if President Obama really believes what he said about James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence needs to be fired. For member of the low-information crowd, the Commander-in-Chief gave his intelligence chief a less-than-rousing endorsement in an interview with 60 Minutes, telling Steve Kroft: \u201cI think our [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110713"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=110713"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110713\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110713"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110713"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110713"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}