[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers
Daily Email Summary


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics
Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally

MBA Member

Blue CA Ad Network
Join Our eMail List
Email:

Photobucket

Leon Panetta Selected As CIA Director

by: David Dayen

Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 11:45:37 AM PST


I'm having some computer issues, but I have been able to notice that Leon Panetta, former White House Chief of Staff under Clinton, has been tapped for the CIA Director position.  Digby references this article from Panetta from this year:

Even though we now know that there were intelligence officials who questioned the assertion, few leaders were willing to challenge this argument for war because they knew it might undermine public support for the president's decision to invade Iraq.

More recently, President Bush vetoed a law that would require the CIA and all the intelligence services to abide by the same rules on torture as contained in the U.S. Army Field Manual [...]

all forms of torture have long been prohibited by American law and international treaties respected by Republican and Democratic presidents alike.

Our forefathers prohibited "cruel and unusual punishment" because that was how tyrants and despots ruled in the 1700s. They wanted an America that was better than that. Torture is illegal, immoral, dangerous and counterproductive. And yet, the president is using fear to trump the law.

I hope he gets cracking on putting the CIA under the Army Field Manual.  That would be a very good start.

As a side note, Panetta has been leading one of the most insufferable organizations in California's history, a high Broderist effort called California Forward, which thinks the biggest problem in the state is that lawmakers from both sides don't have drinks together anymore, or something.  At least Panetta's influence on the state will be lessened.  He's not my favorite guy by any stretch, but if he can manage to not have the CIA kidnapping and torturing anymore he can hold his head up high.

UPDATE by Robert: Apparently DiFi isn't exactly wild about Panetta at CIA:

"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."

David Dayen :: Leon Panetta Selected As CIA Director
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Great way to kick him upstairs (0.00 / 0)
Panetta is widely respected around Monterey for his work on setting up the Panetta Institute of Public Policy, and while I have long shared your disdain of the California Backward project, I do still respect him as someone who genuinely does care about good government, even if he is totally wrong on how to produce it in California.

He's no outsider - nobody who served as Clinton's chief of staff could be - but that Monterey Herald op-ed does suggest he is opposed to the torture and wiretapping moves of the Bush years, so we'll be getting someone untainted by that in charge of the CIA - a pretty big victory.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


hopefully California Forward is now dead for good (0.00 / 0)
I like his statements on torture on wiretapping, but a blow to California Forward is great news for the state.

[ Parent ]
Somehow, DiFi's problem is not my problem (0.00 / 0)
Panetta came out loud and proud against torture.  Which is more than I can say for her.

Don't know anything about what history these two have with each other, although both are pretty similar on most of the issues where folks like us have problems with DiFi.


big tell (8.00 / 1)
If DiFi is opposed he is probably a good pick.

[ Parent ]
Both induce post partisan depression (0.00 / 0)
Normally I'd agree. But I don't think this is about policy.  If you put Leon in drag, you'd have trouble telling him from Feinstein.

Leon's no liberal, and Leon's no dove.  And he's so post-partisan that you want to replay Barney Frank's clip about "post-partisan-depression" at the thought of him.

My guess is that something else is going on here.


[ Parent ]
Some more (0.00 / 0)
from the LAT.  Feinstein may actually try to stop this nomination.  Unbelievable.  This has to be more than just her turning up her nose because she wasn't consulted.  What's going on?

I have to wonder (0.00 / 0)
If there isn't bad blood between them over something we aren't aware of, going back years. Maybe something during the Clinton years?

They seem like political soulmates - centrists who love bipartisanship and who disdain the left. Panetta began his career working for Republicans - first US Senator Thomas Kuchel, a liberal from California, and then serving as Nixon's Civil Rights chief in the old HEW (he was forced out shortly into Nixon's first term when Panetta refused to gut enforcement as Nixon and his Southern allies demanded).

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
Atrios came up with a good find (6.00 / 2)
From her statement on Porter Goss:

After much thought and a careful review of the record, I voted today to confirm the nomination of Representative Porter Goss to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (DCI). But I do have some serious concerns - especially about the impact of this nomination on intelligence reform and his record of partisanship in Congress.

I believe the President should have the prerogative to appoint who he wants to be the DCI, or for any other senior position, subject only to the requirement that the person be qualified for the job. As a former CIA officer, a former Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and a former Army intelligence officer, I think he is certainly qualified. If he is confirmed, I would hope that he demonstrates the necessary independence required of the DCI. But there are still some open questions, which gave me some hesitancy in supporting the nomination.

Funny how she believes a Republican president can do whatever he wants, but god forbid a Democratic president try the same!

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


Given the cluster**** Goss made of the CIA (0.00 / 0)
it's worth circulating that statement.

First, because it's clear that she was willing to defer to Bush on this.

Second, because her judgment as to what "qualified" means doesn't match what most of us mean when we say "qualified".  I do not think this word means what she thinks it means.


[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads
Photobucket


Support Calitics:

Shop on Amazon.com

Advertisers

California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch
Powered by: SoapBlox