Clemons on the Leaks that Did Craig In
Since we’ve chatted so much about the Greg Craig ouster, I thought I’d link to Steve Clemons’ piece on it (which uses a Nina Totenberg quote to suggest my reading–that this came from Rahm–is correct). The most interesting news in Steve’s piece is this tidbit.
Gregory Craig, White House counsel to President Obama and national security advisor to Obama during the presidential campaign, resigned his post this past Friday. But when rumors broke Thursday of his imminent departure, Craig had not written his farewell note and may not have planned to leave – yet.
I guess that’s a polite way of saying–in a piece about White House leaks–that whoever was spreading that news on Thursday night knew of Craig’s ouster before Craig himself did.
The rest of Steve’s piece serves as a nice object lesson for President Obama about what happens when No Drama Obama is replaced by Rahmpant leaking.
But the sustained nature of the leaks and—and the fact that they ultimately proved to be true—indicates something quite disappointing for anyone who had hoped that the Obama White House would operate more transparently and honestly than the Bush team had.
In fact, leaks are becoming standard fare by key players in the Obama administration. Someone, most likely on the military/intel side of the president’s national security bureaucracy, leaked Afghanistan Commanding General Stanley McChrystal’s report to Bob Woodward. Recently, other political players infuriated U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry by leaking his eleventh-hour contrarian view on a U.S. force surge to the press.
But it’s quite hard to maintain the kind of Obama-esque upbeat tone of transparency and forthrightness and punish staff for leaking when the president himself is standing by and doing nothing as his closest advisors undermine one of their own.
[snip]
Now that the White House has opened the door to the political tradecraft of leaks, others on the Obama team may feel empowered to deploy these indirect assaults in their own battles against internal foes. Given the “team of rivals” Obama has assembled in nearly every policy arena, the coming policy wars in and around the White House will be fascinating to watch.
Now, Steve is, as always, exceedingly polite here, so he doesn’t connect these events as closely as he might have.
But he’s clearly suggesting that once you let Rahm and his leaky mouth run rampant, then you can’t very well complain when General McChrystal uses leaks to force Obama’s hand on Afghanistan–or when Eikenberry (whom the White House seems to accuse of leaking his own statements) of returning the fire.
And that deal with the Devil does more than just make the White House an unpleasant place to work. It also makes Obama more vulnerable. No matter what Obama thinks of him, Rahm is far from the most adept player at beltway leaks. So by tolerating this practice, Obama puts himself at risk.
Rahm is following the Rumsfeld-Cheney playbook. The first thing you do in power is scupper the careers of your closest colleagues who might oppose your views. R&C ousted what might have been the most prominent national security adviser and secretary of state of his generation: Henry Kissinger. They ousted the then Vice President and SecDef, too, and presumably, a selection of less public officials and bureaucrats who were in their networks. All under the nose of President Ford. Except that it would be much harder to accuse Mr. Obama of the genial unawareness that Mr. Ford made his trademark.
Rahm is Republican-lite. He’s no Democrat. As nominal Labor Party prime minister Tony Blair out-Toried the Conservatives for ten years, Rahm seems to want to out-Republican the GOP. His imprint is becoming the defining characteristic of this administration. Obama is making that his own as much as the Bush-Cheney orphan excesses that he has adopted and taken to his bosom.
Oh the day that someone leaks that Rahm is out. Now that is an Obama leak I can believe in.
Yes we can…only hope…that day comes.
Has been suggested to me that the McChrystal and Eikenberry leaks weren’t actually by either McChrystal or Eikenberry, but others and possibly from White House staffers.
Not necessarily Rahm, mind you…but it does say something about the aggressiveness of leaking all over the place and how they are being used to manipulate the public’s perception about everything to the point where we can’t believe or trust anything we hear.
Would be nice to see the administration revert to some of the discipline it had as a campaign on messaging, but that would take removal of some personnel.
Starting with Rahm.
Heck, if Obama had followed through on his promises of transparency there wouldn’t be any value in leaking. The leaks are harmful precisely because Obama/Rahm are trying to follow the Bush/Cheney model of keeping everything secret so they can’t be tried for their war crimes. Well, I don’t know that they’re actually guilty of war crimes yet, but I’d say they’re accessories after the fact.
When you cannot trust the news, how can the citizenry have a role in government? Looks like a well thought out plan to me.
O/T Rove much? Got his scent all over it.
Lies, Ex-Cons, And ‘Nasty’ Bathrooms: Behind The Scenes At A Top GOP Outreach Firm
So Eikenberry was pissed about the leak of his dissent? Now that’s an interesting angle. If he didn’t want to derail the effort to escalate in Afghanistan, who did? A Biden loyalist? Maybe even an Obama loyalist, if the Prez wanted to avoid escalating but didn’t want to be the one to shoot it down? Also, why wouldn’t he want it known that he’s begging Obama not to escalate?
(Of course, maybe it’s bullcrap and Eikenberry did leak it, and either people want to discredit the leak or Eikenberry wants to distance himself from the fallout. Still, makes me wonder …)
Who were the leaks intended to sway? Were they all coming from the same person? Is Rahm suggesting the leaks came from Craig? Are you suggesting the leaks came from RahmAre you maintaining that the Clemon’s piece “came from Rahm” even though Clemons seems critical of Beltway leaks in the piece?
I guess i’m confused today as i don’t seem to get where you’re going with this…
o/t i know, but any new word on Dawn Johnsen’s OLC bid?
I think the PAST leaks were intended to exacerbate the illusion of incompetence and lack of faith in Craig to make it more likely that he’d be ousted.
Excellent nutshell.
Particularly at such a critical moment for so many key decisions, including pressuring Israel and other Middle East interests.
“…Rhampant leaking…”
O-o-o-o, Miz Marcy, you DO have a way with words….
Bob in AZ
One more probably unrelated issue.
In a surprise reversal, The CIA/Panetta won his turf war over who gets to pick station managers over Blair. The news came out in the last half week or so.
Insofar as there seemed to be an anti-Craig push from those who thought he exposed the torturers, though, there’s a chance it’s related.
Here’s one link to the Panetta-Blair story.
What a way to run a bureaucracy, eh? I mean, let’s setup as many parallel intelligence bureaucracy as possible and that way we’ll get way better intelligence! Not.
What this also may signify is the lack of executive experience in the highest reaches of the Obama administration. Napolitano and Sebelius are the highest ranking members that I can think of with executive experience as governors. Who else?
Maybe Obama needs a special Executive Committee of his highest ranking officials with real executive experience to advise him on how to deal with this crap.
Bob in AZ
Given the regular presence of material from unnamed insider DC sources that appear in his posts at The Washington Note, I find it highly amusing that Steve Clemons is bemoaning leaks.
While Rahmbo may have gotten a scalp this time with Craig, I’ve gotta believe that this only moves him one step closer to his own smackdown by far more capable players.
Rahmbo will end up biting the hand that feeds him. Just like his last sojourn in the White House during the Clinton Administration, his own day of reckoning is coming.
And I bet he’ll never see it coming.
Oh, IhopeIhopeIhopeIhopeIhope!
Loss of Democratic majority without meaningful changes to basic Bush administration assault on the constitution and its expansion of executive branch power.
One term president and the return of criminals like Feith, Abrams, Bolton, Wolfowitz, Mad Lizzie Cheney, and the ever ebullient Mary Matalin as spokesperson for the empire.
All made possible by reaching across the aisle instead of ramming through legislation to help the average American family.
Coming soon: Feinstein and other Democratic traitors to the middle class leading a commission to look at Social Security and Medicare. There will be no more talk of Medicare for all because Medicare is about to be eviscerated.
Don’t expect Rahm to go until after the 2010 elections. The last thing the Obama administration wants is to have Rahm back in Congress. And if he flames out after his replacement has been re-elected to Congress, he is unlikely to get his old seat back.
ew “Now, Steve is, as always, exceedingly polite here, so he doesn’t connect these events as closely as he might have.”
Washington Note one of my daily stops. Great information and conversations/debates over there.
Steve has incredible access to some of the hot shots. I am sure that “exceedingly polite” strategy keeps him being able to walk through doors.
Chris Matthew has been hammering away at the leaks, who is leaking and why?
“drip drip drip”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxhDuLH0vBc&videos=iT3lDOTXqbk
On the Afghanistan topic.
Went to a talk on the campus of Ohio University the other night put together by some dear friends.
The guest and focus of the talk
“Peace in Afghanistan, is it possible? Afghanistan’s future and the role of THE U.S.”
People for Peace and Justice and the OU School of Media Arts and Studies are sponsoring a talk by Afghan doctoral candidate, Roshan Noorzai. This event will be held at The Friends of the Library Room, on the 3rd floor of Alden Library, at 7:30PM, on Thursday Nov. 12th.
Roshan Noorzai, a native Afghan, was brought up during the years of the Afghan conflict with the Soviet Union. He experienced displacements inside Afghanistan and lived as a refugee in Iran and Pakistan. His efforts and hard work made it possible for him to have an education. In the post-9/11 era, Roshan was employed by the United Nations and USAID on a number of projects. His job included working with communities in different provinces. Currently, Roshan is a Ph.D. candidate in Mass Communication at the School of Media Arts and Studies. This summer, he went to Afghanistan to collect data for his dissertation, “Conflict and Peace in Afghanistan: the Role of Media.”
The conflict in Afghanistan is a very complicated issue for those of us in the US. Why are we still there 8 years after 9/11? Can we be helpful to the people of Afghanistan? Is the human and economic cost worth the effort to citizens of the US? Roshan will share his personal story and give us a look at his own country. He will share his vision for Afghanistan’s future and how Afghanis might get there. He will comment on whether the US can be helpful in this effort. Please come, listen, ask questions, and share your thoughts. This is an important and costly issue for the US and Afghanistan.
MEDIA RELEASE FOR USE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2009
Sixty people gathered in Alden Library November 12th to hear Afghan PhD. candidate, Roshan Noorzai, share his insights about current realities in Afghanistan. He spent last summer there, researching for his dissertation on the media’s role in conflict. This program was sponsored by People for Peace and Justice, and the OU School of Media Arts and Studies.
Elements Noorzai sees as essential to peace include 1) gradual withdrawal of foreign troops, starting with the rural areas 2) a transition period allowing leaders of traditional local institutions to settle differences among themselves, and provide a collective decision-making platform for leaders in their respective regions, before the institutions of the central government are reestablished 3) provision of basic services to communities, particularly rural villages, through local institutions with the help of the international community
4) establishment of a respoonsive and corruption-free central government all Afghans can trust. Noorzai observed that Al Qaeda forces are no longer in Afghanistan. They have largely withdrawn to Pakistan. The majority of armed opposition groups, the so-called Taliban, are pursing local goals, not waging holy war against the West. This said, events such as the 2001 suffocation and shooting by US troops of thousands of Taliban soldiers in transit, and current bombing of villages that kill both civilians and Taliban, have left a collective bitterness against international forces.
Noorzai pointed out that while Afghanistan’s ethnic divisions and regional power struggles have been the main source of its post-Soviet conflict, three invasions by the British, one by the USSR and the current eight-year US/NATO war on terror have bred a national “culture of resistance” to changes and modern structures. These invasions, together with internal conflict, have also ruined the country’s infrastructure and left infant mortality there highest in the world. Constant upheaval has meant no effective system of state taxation to provide basic services. Potential national income from gas and oil pipelines to run across Afghanistan from resources in the Central Asian republics to markets in Pakistan and India, is unavailable because the country is too insecure. Afghanis do have nationwide media access by radio, with nearly 60% of the population listening to 3 stations per day. There are many independent TV channels and international news is available. The programming focus, however is on violent conflicts.There is little coverage of constructive development efforts.
The Afghan economy has been depleted by drought as well as wars. Many fruitful orchards have been replaced by opium poppy growing, which takes less water. Although the central government has destroyed poppy crops in some provinces, it is now Afghanistan’s main income source. Islamic law forbids drug use, so all is exported to meet the international demand for heroin. Joining the Taliban as fighters is the only other form of paid employment in many rural areas. US participation in international efforts to assist Afghans in transitioning to an economy that meets basic human needs would go a long way toward reducing recruitment into radical terrorist groups.
Readers interested in assisting with local efforts to move US policy away from military occupation toward development in Afghanistan, and toward non-violent solutions in other conflict areas, are welcome to attend the monthly meetings of People for Peace & Justice, third Mondays from 4:30 to 6:00PM at United Campus Ministry, 18 N. College St., Athens. Monday, November 16th is the next scheduled meeting date. For further information, call 698-8625 or 448-3071.
Helen Horn, 698-8625, [email protected]
5975 Marshfield Rd., New Marshfield, OH 45766
————————————————————————-
Here is part of the latest response from my friend Haroon who is now back in Afghanistan. So happy he is back with his family. He missed them so much while he was working on his Masters here at Ohio University.
“Thank you Kathleen for sending me the articles. Increasing the troops will not solved the problem. Working on our own security forces and peace talk with Taliban and Gulbudeen Hikmatyar and to gain the trust and confident of the ordinary people and villagers through the development process is the best option to tackle the current security problems.”
————————————————————————–
Roshan Phd candidate, Haroon and Haroon’s father a retired Brigadier General in Afghanistan (fought the Russians with the Mujahadeen) and Ambassador Eikenberry basically all say very similar things about the situation in Afghanistan. Instead of spending 98% of the U.S. money being spent there on defense contracts, weapons, control of convoys (contracts) etc. Get that money, support to the people of Afghanistan in the form or medical, education, etc.
If you have not listened to this interview at Democracy Now
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/12/taliban
“JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, your article goes into the shadowy—the network of companies, and specifying several of the companies that are involved. And you point how many of them have—are headed by relatives of people who are high up in the Karzai government. Could you talk about, for instance, Watan Risk, is it?
ARAM ROSTON: Yeah.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And NCL Holdings?
ARAM ROSTON: Yeah, that was—the original mission I was doing was—original story I was doing was this sort of web of nepotism and corruption, inside deals, in security contracts and logistics contracts. And it expanded when I—people all started trying to tell me, “You should do this story, as well.”
Watan Risk is an extraordinary company. It’s run by the—by two brothers, the Popal brothers. They’re relatives of the President of the country. They’re also convicted felons here in the United States for drug offenses. And one of them was an interpreter and basically a spokesman for the Taliban at the end of the Taliban regime in 2001. And yet, here he is now. He runs, and his brother—he and his brother run this very lucrative, very important, very big security company, Watan Risk Group. According to many people I spoke to, it runs this very important corridor. It controls it, because it has a relationship with the key warlord and commands who controls that.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And that corridor is Highway 1, is it?
ARAM ROSTON: Highway 1, which runs through Kandahar, which leads you to the South, leads you to, in many cases—basically leads you to the war zone. This is where you need to go to get to the conflict, to the border, and so forth.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you tell us where you start this article? You’re mentioning these people, like Ahmad Rateb Popal, but talking about what happened October 29th, 2001, the news conference.”