Obama’s National Intelligence Director Resigns
[Guest post by DRJ]
Obama Administration National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair has resigned, apparently under pressure:
“One official tells ABC News that President Obama sought Blair’s resignation earlier this week, but Blair pushed back, hoping to convince the president to change his mind.
That did not happen.
The official says that there were high-profile problems on Blair’s watch and those certainly didn’t help him, but the ultimate reason Blair is gone is because of the dissatisfaction President Obama and the National Security Staff had with Blair’s ability to share intelligence in a tight, coherent and timely way.
This was, the official said, the result of long pent-up dissatisfaction with Blair as the principal intelligence adviser to the president, responsible for briefing the president every day and briefing the National Security Staff. In short, officials didn’t think the briefings were relevant to what the president was focused on that day or time period. They weren’t crisp or well-presented.
At other times, Blair didn’t seem to take “no” for an answer, the official said. He was pushing an initiative dealing with intelligence and other countries, and he kept pushing it even after President Obama turned it down.”
Blair has had a “rocky tenure” in the Obama Administration so his departure is not surprising, but I don’t trust anonymous single-sourced reports to tell me the whole story.
Nevertheless, it seems clear that Obama turned to John Brennan for intelligence advice earlier this year. Some see that as unfortunate.
— DRJ
Toughest job in the world: convincing Obama to do something about Islamist terror.
Patricia (160852) — 5/20/2010 @ 8:26 pmVia Powerline:
Here’s a statement from Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R., Mich.) ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee. Hoekstra lauds Blair as “the one person you could count on for rationality among Holder, Napolitano and Brennan.” He says the resignation is “the result of the Obama administration’s rampant politicization of national security and outright disregard for congressional intelligence oversight:”
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmRmMTFiMzdjZjkyMTcyZDg2YjkxMjAwZWFkZGIyZTc=
MD in Philly (88a119) — 5/20/2010 @ 8:28 pmNo loss. A bureaucrat in blue.
nk (db4a41) — 5/20/2010 @ 8:41 pmMD – Remember the leftists wailing, gnashing their teeth, and rending their garments over their projection that Bush was politicizing intelligence and national security?
JD (d55760) — 5/20/2010 @ 8:47 pmJD- Indeed. You can alwasy tell what the Dems intend or are doing by how loud they attack. They figure that whoever accuses first and loudest wins the day. Unfortunately they seem to be correct way too often in that assumption.
MD in Philly (88a119) — 5/20/2010 @ 8:52 pmMD – That is a very very very good point. When you hear the MSNBC outrage meter get cranked up, it is usually pretty safe to assume that they are doing exactly what they are accusing someone else of doing.
JD (d55760) — 5/20/2010 @ 8:55 pmSome see that as unfortunate.
In a nutshell…
IOW, the guy in the Oval Office is going with his gut instinct, favoring his ideological passion, which is quite leftwing.
Therefore, God (or Allah) help us.
Considering biblical-type predictions popping up with greater frequency a few years ago, I sometimes wonder if we in America are merely observing at this moment in time a slice of history unfolding like either Kabuki theater or bad soap opera. Or beyond that, if the United States — and, in turn, the Western World in general — really ended up jumping the shark in November 2008.
Mark (411533) — 5/20/2010 @ 9:03 pmJD- Classic example was Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame. Before Wilson, Plame, and others in the CIA could be called to account for how that mock-investigation was pulled off, they hit first.
The thing is, one almost has to be a pathological liar to be that brazen and get away with it.
G’night.
MD in Philly (88a119) — 5/20/2010 @ 9:05 pmI think Hoekstra’s assessment is on the money among that choice of individuals.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 5/20/2010 @ 9:16 pmAs bad as Blair was, and I think he was in way over his pay-grade, Brennan has been a disaster as National Security Counsel Advisor for Counter-terrorism, and doesn’t look any more promising as DNI.
AD - RtR/OS! (c4618b) — 5/20/2010 @ 11:45 pmIt’s could be a very, very rocky two and one-half years.
Too many people will die due to this preening cock-of-the-walk President, both here and abroad.
…any bets on how long Panetta lasts at CIA?
AD - RtR/OS! (c4618b) — 5/20/2010 @ 11:46 pmJohn Browning is still the Director of National Intelligence here on FOB DeDe, and no changes are foreseen in the coming days.
of course, in keeping with policy, if there were changes, we wouldn’t say a damn thing about them. 😀
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 5/21/2010 @ 12:01 amAccording to the AP this was, in large part, about Obama favoring Panetta over Blair.
Icy Texan (892e7a) — 5/21/2010 @ 3:04 amThe Obama national security team is ship of fools.
DavidL (2a854d) — 5/21/2010 @ 4:12 amBoth Israel and Iran are watching this closely. One is drawing the correct conclusion. Maybe both. We will be very lucky if the middle east is not radioactive by the time Obama leaves office in 2013, if not before.
Mike K (82f374) — 5/21/2010 @ 6:40 amIntelligence and Obama Admistration is an oxymoron.
PCD (b3210f) — 5/21/2010 @ 7:23 amMoney quote:
“…officials didn’t think the briefings were relevant to what the president was focused on that day…”
Maybe it’s just me (please correct me if I’m wrong here), but it seems to me that the Prez gets advisers to, like, advise him on important issues (for instance, say, National Intelligence), and he should be focused on what his advisers are telling him he should be focused on, not vice versa. Unless, of course, they’re not really advisers…maybe a NatIntDir is really a courtier…then, I guess the “officials” got it completely right. Sorry. My bad.
This may explain why there are so many “unexpected” events in this administration.
Arrogance, much?
DrummingAncient (02422e) — 5/21/2010 @ 7:36 amThat is an excellent point, Old Drummer. But surely Blair should have been able to show how national healthcare was an important aspect of intelligence gathering.
JD (d55760) — 5/21/2010 @ 7:41 amMore evidence that the Obama administration is a bunch of incompetents in the foreign policy / counter-terrorism realm.
Dangerously incompetent clowns actually.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/21/2010 @ 8:46 amWhen Dennis Blair asked for Obama’s papers, that was all she wrote. The poor misguided man just had to be run out of dodger city before the sun could shine the light of day on his legitimate but impertinent request.
ropelight (b919b6) — 5/21/2010 @ 10:39 amComment by Icy Texan — 5/21/2010 @ 3:04 am
But, it seems that the lead in Intell is focused at the NSC (Brennan), and it will be interesting to see if Panetta (and the bureaucracy he oversees) can defer completely to that direction? They weren’t able to under W, but perhaps Obowman’s and Brennan’s ultimate goal of surrender to IslamFascism is more in line with the conventional wisdom within the CIA (and Dept of State – which has been, or so it seems, in the pocket of the al-Sauds for a generation or more) than was the combative stance taken by W?
AD - RtR/OS! (9200e9) — 5/21/2010 @ 11:20 amComment by redc1c4 — 5/21/2010 @ 12:01 am
Excellent choice!
AD - RtR/OS! (9200e9) — 5/21/2010 @ 11:24 am“Some see that as unfortunate”, what an understatement. Mr. AlQuds Brennan who was overawed at how the Saudis manage their holy places of Mecca and Medina, but somehow is horrified at how Israel manages the numerous holy places in Eretz Israel, is now the Obama Administration’s go to guy on foreign affairs. The Administration is day by day becoming a foreign affairs joke, what with Calderon lambasting the US and Arizona policies; allowing brutal repressions by thugocracies; coddling enemies and alienating allies; and disclosing our state secrets on missile launches and other weapons tests. We will soon be pining for the days when Amy Carter was giving nuclear weapons advice to her father. She was a grown up by the standards set in the current administration.
eaglewingz08 (1e4d33) — 5/21/2010 @ 11:38 amAnything linking Obama and intelligence is an oxymoron
Neo (7830e6) — 5/21/2010 @ 11:54 am“…officials didn’t think the briefings were relevant to what the president was focused on that day…”
Remember all the claims that the Bush administration manipulated intel to get what they wanted to hear? Where is the outrage that Obama fires someone for telling him intel he does not want to hear?
** crickets **
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/21/2010 @ 12:01 pm