NATIONAL SECURITY, NATIONAL SCHMECURITY!

Friday, June 8th, 2012 | Uncategorized

Barack Obama has an election to win, gosh darn it, and what’s more important for the health, safety and prosperity of this country than a second Barack Obama term?

The New York Times revealed today in a major news article that the well-known Stuxnet malware attack on the Iranian nuclear program was, in fact, an American operation. Most experts had felt that was the most logical conclusion, but it had never been confirmed. The Times report is based on interviews with anonymous sources “because the effort remains highly classified, and parts of it continue to this day,” reporter David Sanger wrote. While this is an acknowledgement of U.S. prowess in cyberwarfare, the revelation is an inexcusable breach of security that seems to be a part of a disturbing trend.

One has to ask: Why is the Obama Administration choosing to continue revealing operational information that is normally not released? This includes the specific units that conducted the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, information from the bin Laden compound, classified information on the bin Laden raid, details of drone operations, and now secrets about cyberwarfare. There is NO good operational reason for doing this. The only “logical” reason is a tight race for presidency. Does this mean that the closer that we get to the election, the more operational secrets will be given away?

The larger reality is that these leaks, designed to highlight the President’s credentials as a tough leader, are trying to mask the fact that Obama has virtually nothing to show on key national security issues. Progress in the big and important issues, such as relations with China and Russia, broadly fending off Iranian nuclear development, and keeping the rogue regime in North Korea inside its box, have all proven elusive for this Administration.

When progress is absent, a desperate Administration may use leaks, even if it harms national security. The Times reports that Obama “repeatedly expressed concerns that any American acknowledgment that it was using cyberweapons…could enable other countries, terrorists or hackers to justify their own attacks.” So either the Administration completely disregarded its prior national security concerns, or it has no control over sensitive information. Either way, it doesn’t look good.

Some Democrats are horrified.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) said Wednesday she has “never seen it worse” regarding recent national security leaks in a series of reported stories that contained sensitive national security details.

“Well, I’ve been on the Intelligence Committee for 11 years, and I have never seen it worse,” Feinstein said of the leaks in a CNN interview.

The House and Senate Intelligence Committees announced Wednesday they would draft new laws concerning leaks of classified and sensitive information. Feinstein is chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Feinstein issued the following statement.

I am deeply disturbed by the continuing leaks of classified information to the media, most recently regarding alleged cyber efforts targeting Iran’s nuclear program.

Today I sent a classified letter to the president outlining my deep concerns about the release of this information. I made it clear that disclosures of this type endanger American lives and undermine America’s national security.

I have spoken with Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, about the possibility of a joint hearing to investigate these leaks.

The Intelligence Committee will soon mark up the FY13 Intelligence Authorization Bill, and it is my intention to include provisions requiring:

  • A timely notification of authorized disclosures and the rationale for those disclosures;
     
  • More forceful investigations of unauthorized disclosures;
     
  • Additional authorities and resources for the U.S. government to identify and prosecute those who violate various federal laws and non-disclosure agreements by revealing highly classified information.

Supporters of the President have only two options, the best of which(for them) is that Barack Obama is the most dangerously inept president the United States has ever had.  That a liberal Democrat like Dianne Feinstein says that the leaks are the worst she’s seen in eleven years rules out any argument the left might make about George W. Bush holdovers sabotaging the Obama Administration.

It’s a silly argument to make anyway in case anyone attempts to make it.  Mr. Bush couldn’t run again so there was no incentive for any Bush appointees to get revenge on Mr. Obama.  And if any Bush leftovers are still in sensitive, national security positions does that not speak to the general incompetence of the current administration?

The other option is far darker.  These leaks are, as was suggested, deliberate and designed to make the President look, well, presidential.  In which case, we move from incompetence to something awfully close to actual treason.

If it was proven that these leaks were deliberate, would the Republicans bring articles of impeachment?  Since hearings take time and the Obama Administration can stonewall better than the Nixon Administration ever could, I don’t think anything’s going to happen any time soon, the Congress will most likely wait for the American people to elect Mitt Romney and do their jobs for them.

But what if Obama wins another term?  Would the Republicans move then?  They might and I think that a lot of House Democrats would join them, knowing that it would be the safest vote in the world insofar as a Democrat-controlled Senate, if there still is one, would never vote to remove Obama from office.

Even if the Republicans gain the Senate this fall, I don’t think they’ll gain two-thirds of it, which is what is required to remove an impeached US president from office so if Barack Obama wins reelection, I seriously doubt that he will go anywhere.  His second term will be a disaster of course.

Obama’s lapdog news media will do what it can for him but no one else will.  And since the Tea Party will make sure that the President knows what the American people think of people who endanger the United States merely for their own aggrandizement, and will do so every chance it gets, Mr. Obama’s second term will be a nightmare, one that he may even choose to cut short.

For the sake of the country, don’t you know.

30 Comments to NATIONAL SECURITY, NATIONAL SCHMECURITY!

Dale Matson
June 8, 2012

Even Democrats like Sen. Dianne Feinstein are calling out Obama on this one. The words amateur combined with narcissist explain much of the overall Obama agenda. His comment early on that he wanted to be an effective president even if it meant he would be a one term president were insincere at best.

Allen Lewis
June 8, 2012

This is beyond bad. I wonder if Feinstein is posturing so as to make the Democrats look like responsible leaders.

If this is coming from the Administration, then it is the dumbest thing I have ever witnessed. Playing around with the security of this country is not a very good or wise thing to do.

But with Bill Clinton – “It’s the Economy Stupid!”™ – undermining Captain Awesome’s economic and budgetary prowess, I guess Team Obama figured his image needed some kind of enhancement. Why not leak this to show that the US is ahead in something, other than being roundly despised around the world [their meme, no mine-aml].

Stupid is as stupid does and politics makes us all a bit stupid at times. I just hope no one dies over this bit of vanity.

WannabeAnglican
June 8, 2012

If, God forbid, Obama is re-elected, with the help of massive election fraud aided by Eric Holder’s DOJ no doubt, impeachment is in order.

I pray we don’t have to go there. I pray that Americans dump Obama and many of his allies in November.

Gregg the obscure
June 8, 2012

I’d say the third option is more likely: it is intentional but it isn’t meant primarily to sway voters. Instead, it’s meant to diminish American exceptionalism and advance transnationalism. A weaker US national security establishment paired with a weaker US economy is a natural goal for folks who want to diminish the influence that the US has wielded and increase the influence of the UN and like-minded outfits.

The one bright spot is that if the policies of the Obamarrhoids on things like hostility to truth, intergenerational genocide and destruction of the family persist, the US won’t deserve to have any influence over anything anyway.

Jacob Morgan
June 8, 2012

Peggy Noonan (she hits and she misses, this was a hit) said it well in her most recent column.

“He’s [Obama] running for President. But why? He could be President now if he wanted to be.”

Only thing he is good at is being a golden calf before which the media can bow down.

Michal
June 8, 2012

Yet another demonstration of the hatred this POTUS has for the country. It can’t be good that prominent members of his own party are criticizing him. Let’s hope the harm he has done can be undone.

mithrax
June 8, 2012

Some of these leaks sounds like they were meant to be threats to other ears, not domestic ones.

Michael D
June 8, 2012

… these leaks, designed to highlight the President’s credentials as a tough leader …

I was appalled when I saw detailed information about the Obama raid, and astonished that it was not treated as a “leak” but rather apparently acknowledged to be public information. These new leaks are even worse. And they do not make Obama look like a tough leader.

The leaks will enrage America’s enemies, who will extrapolate and embellish to raise up armies against the US. They will also force the hands of some key but tentative allies, who can no longer use a “don’t ask don’t tell” approach to US subversive activities. For example consider how things have deteriorated with Pakistan since the Obama raids.

Perhaps more ominously, it raises the spectre of US black ops distrusting the administration, hiding information from them, and ultimately undermining the chain of command.

The obvious question: is this Obama policy, or is this a high-level rogue element trying to undermine Obama? And how would we ever know?

Jacob Morgan
June 8, 2012

It’s the Media’s fault. Don’t let them off the hook. They don’t need 11th hour fair reporting, they need to find a different job.

If they were doctors they’d be sued umpteen millions for malpractice. If they were airline piolts they’d be dead. If they were engineers they’d lose their PE stamp and face jail time. If they were in the military they’d be doing time in the brig. If they were accountants they’d lose their CPA license. If they were lawyers they’d be disbared.

They did not just neglect their duty, they intentionally passed on shameless propaganda. They absolutely failed to justify the rationale behind the first amendment. They are more responsible than Obama is for what has gone on. Obama did what anyone who studied the matter knew he would do. The media lied and lied and missled to bamboozle people into thinking otherwise. The media has done more damage to this country than Stalin or Osama bin Laden.

This isn’t like a doctor who accidentally cuts the wrong vein, it is like a doctor who cuts the wrong vein on purpose; it isn’t malpractice, it is battery with malicious intent.

sybil marshall
June 8, 2012

Very well said, Jacob Morgan!!

M. L. Martin
June 8, 2012

what’s more important for the health, safety and prosperity of this country than a second Barack Obama term?

The lack thereof?

:)

Smurf Breath
June 8, 2012

If, God forbid, Obama is re-elected, with the help of massive election fraud aided by Eric Holder’s DOJ no doubt, impeachment is in order.

This is my worry. He was elected by naive people who felt he was honorable to some degree.

But now he plans to steal our sovereignty through fraud, in order to keep himself in power.

Katherine
June 8, 2012

The administration couldn’t forgo the opportunity to look like heroes by releasing the news of Bin Laden’s death within a few hours of its occurrence, thus destroying the usefulness of much of the intelligence material taken in the raid. These leaks are more of the same. Narcissism and politics trump the national interest every time. I don’t know if they recognize the national interest.

Christopher Johnson
June 8, 2012

I see no reason to question the concern of Dianne Feinstein and other Democrats. For many people on the other side of the ideological divide from me, politics ends when the security of the country is at stake. If these leaks are intentional, Senator Feinstein seems to be trying to talk Barack Obama back to reality.

Jim the Puritan
June 8, 2012

Obama would have been toast long ago if it weren’t for the media not only turning a blind eye to all his administration’s transgressions, but also their continually carrying water for the Democrats on every one of their press releases.

Imagine if Obama got the same scrutiny that George Bush did.

Every morning I listen to NPR to get the latest talking points for the day, explaining why all the screw-ups have nothing to do with Obama or his party. I think it has become so predictable that a lot of the American public just doesn’t buy it any more.

Katherine
June 8, 2012

I agree, Christopher. I think Feinstein’s concern is genuine and valid.

midwestnorwegian
June 8, 2012

I seem to remember Clinton selling missile technology to China during his term. See a pattern here?

Don Janousek
June 8, 2012

Once upon a time they used to hang and use the electric chair on people who did stuff like this.

The Rosenbergs, for example, fried for the secrets they gave away to the Bolsheviks.

And England used the gallows quite frequently in World Wars I and II.

However, after I am elected High Exalted Mystic Ruler of the U.S. and all Dominions Beyond the Seas, I will be merciful and only sentence NoBama to life at hard labor.

LaVallette
June 9, 2012

Has this guy no shame in his ambition to emulate people who are by far his betters, such as Bush, Thatcher, Blair, Chaney and Kissinger? Is the Obummer also a “war criminal” now ?

Allen Lewis
June 9, 2012

Christopher -

I note your point (and Katherine’s) about Senator Feinstein’s sincerity. I suppose I have become so jaded with the Democratic leadership in the US Senate that I do not trust any of them to do what they took and oath to do: “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”

I owe her a apology. But it will be most interesting to see what the members of the Select Committee on Intelligence do about the loose cannons in Washington, DC.

Allen Lewis
June 9, 2012

I also applaud Jacob Morgan’s summary of the culpability of the media in these matters. Well said, sir!

It is difficult for reporters not to editorialize in their writing. But that is the purpose of Editors: to reign in the excesses of reporters and to train them in objective reporting.

However, now that “investigative journalism” has become a blood sport, even Editors have lost site of their raison d’etre

Katherine
June 9, 2012

The NY Times is claiming that it didn’t receive “leaks.” Rather, it was their reporters’ diligent investigative work. If diligent investigation by civilians can turn up highly classified information we’ve got another sort of problem. I think instead that the Times calls it not a “leak” because the reporter called the target and not the other way around. In the Bush years the papers regularly printed leaks intended to damage Bush, and now they’re printing things intended to benefit Obama. When top Democrats are as outraged as Republicans I’d say the strategy is backfiring, like so much the Obama team does.

Ed the Roman
June 9, 2012

If everybody is keeping their NDA, and documents are handled properly, the reporters will not discover anything that has not been formally declassified.

If the President says something is not classified, it’s not classified anymore.

Which is not to say that it is impossible for the President to declassify something that objectively should still be kept secret.

Katherine
June 9, 2012

Exactly, Ed the Roman. Either it’s criminal leaks or the President has authorized release of the information.

The Pilgrim
June 9, 2012

I think the truly sad detail of this whole sordid mess is not that the administration would leak information for material gain, but that an overwhelming majority of Americans take for granted that they would.

Not to worry though, the AG is “taking over” the investigations, and will root out the vile perpetrators, no matter where they mat be…

http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/Holder-appoints-2-US-attorneys-to-lead-leaks-probe.html

The Pilgrim
June 9, 2012

That should be “political gain.”

Allen Lewis
June 9, 2012

@The Pilgrim-
That should be “political gain.”

Sometimes, political and material gain are one and the same!

chey
June 9, 2012

I wrote my congressman asking him to push for an independent special prosecutor. I just have a problem with any process Holder has his greasy hands in.

The Pilgrim
June 10, 2012

“I just have a problem with any process Holder has his greasy hands in.”

My grandfather would have said, “They are sending the fox to check on the noise in the hen house.”

Narcissist-in-Chief…
June 11, 2012

[...] Strange times »Narcissist-in-Chief…June 11, 2012 By Mark Shea Leave a Comment…appalls even Dianne Feinstein with his willingness to risk the lives of our troops in order t…The man is not a genius. The man is stunningly amateurish and vain. And stuff like this just make [...]

Support The MCJ

Search

Links

Meta