Leaker-in-Chief

[Geee]

Weekly Standard:

The Justice Department has launched an investigation into the White House’s handling of classified information. The spur seems to have been the June 1 New York Times article by David Sanger, sourced to current and former U.S. officials, revealing sensitive details about the Stuxnet and Flame computer worms and other parts of the Obama administration’s cyber campaign to disrupt and spy on Iran’s nuclear weapons program. By the way, none of the officials, according to Sanger, “would allow their names to be used because the effort remains highly classified, and parts of it continue to this day.”

 

Last week, legislators on both sides of the aisle deplored the administration’s inability, or unwillingness, to keep national security secrets. Leaders of the Senate and House intelligence committees—Senators Saxby Chambliss and Dianne Feinstein and Representatives Mike Rogers and C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger—released a statement noting, “We have become increasingly concerned at the continued leaks regarding sensitive intelligence programs and activities, including specific details of sources and methods.”

In his June 8 press conference Obama tried to push back against the gathering storm. “The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive,” he said. “It’s wrong.”

 

The president and the New York Times can’t both be right. If the president is correct, then the paper of record, which has so far seemed to be a willing receptacle for the administration’s leaks, must be printing fabrications. Last month the same newspaper detailed how the president directs U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan and Yemen based on a classified “kill list” of terror suspects, a story based on information from “three dozen” of the president’s “current and former advisers.” So the latest Times article on Iran, revealing what the administration has now tacitly acknowledged as a joint U.S.-Israeli program, looks to be merely the most recent installment in a campaign of intentional leaks damaging to our national security.

[Valin]

@Geee

 

Last week, legislators on both sides of the aisle deplored the administration’s inability, or unwillingness, to keep national security secrets. Leaders of the Senate and House intelligence committees—Senators Saxby Chambliss and Dianne Feinstein and Representatives Mike Rogers and C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger—released a statement noting, “We have become increasingly concerned at the continued leaks regarding sensitive intelligence programs and activities, including specific details of sources and methods.”

 

 

 

 

In his June 8 press conference Obama tried to push back against the gathering storm. “The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive,” he said. “It’s wrong.”

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbRQsAQTc8s

[Valin]

Wikipedia: Tom" Donilon's vast deep and extensive experience in national security issues.

I can't tell you have incredibly impressed I am with him. Truly one of the best and the brightest.

Where's Amy Carter when you need her!

[NCTexan]

As the New York Times continues to defend its coverage about President Barack Obama's terrorist "kill list" and the White House's cyber strategy against Iran, the president said it was "offensive" for people to assume or believe one of his aides leaked the top secret information to the press.

 

I don't know.... but this statement by "The One" made me as angry as anything that he's said in a while. I'm not sure exactly why, but "I'm offended that he's offended."

 

I just read an amazing arrogance in that statement.

 

And maybe... "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

[cudjo]

As the New York Times continues to defend its coverage about President Barack Obama's terrorist "kill list" and the White House's cyber strategy against Iran, the president said it was "offensive" for people to assume or believe one of his aides leaked the top secret information to the press.

 

I don't know.... but this statement by "The One" made me as angry as anything that he's said in a while. I'm not sure exactly why, but "I'm offended that he's offended."

 

I just read an amazing arrogance in that statement.

 

And maybe... "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

 

I don't care how offensive he finds it, I find it offensive every time he opens his mouth

[Valin]

White House National Security Leaks Draw Surprising Political Pushback

Austin Bay

6/13/12

 

A string of White House information leaks, each leak a war-story skit crafted to buff President Barack Obama's tough-dude cred in the upcoming presidential election, has very likely harmed U.S. national security interests. These leaks may also make future military and intelligence counter-terror operations more difficult to organize and, for the American covert intelligence agents and special operations commandos who jeopardize their lives in these grim endeavors, much riskier to execute.

 

Little wonder the "Obama's guts, Obama's glory, vote Obama" media campaign, employing such narrative-dominating powers as Hollywood and The New York Times, is backfiring on Obama's election campaign. Spicing the narrative with concrete military and intelligence operational details has angered and energized a very small but aggressive group, Special Operations Speaks (SOS). Its members are retired U.S. special operations soldiers, airmen, sailors and Marines, the mentors and comrades of the guys who really did get Osama bin Laden.

 

Let's take the current harm and future difficulties first.

 

(Snip)