« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

President Obama Skipped His Intel Brief the Day After the U.S. Ambassador to Libya was Murdered by Terrorists

Marc Thiessen provides a shocker in his Washington Post column: the day after America’s embassy in Cairo was assaulted and the consulate in Benghazi, Libya fell victim to an armed attack that killed four, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, the president once again skipped his intelligence briefing, choosing instead to fly off to Las Vegas to fundraise while the world continued to burn.

This after being inexcusably unprepared for, and unaware of the threat of, violent protests and, in the case of Libya, a terrorist attack against the official representatives of the United States of America in two North African nations. Since those attacks, protests have taken place in Yemen, Tunisia, and Kuwait, with State Department warnings having been issued for several more countries.

Also since those attacks, President Obama has criticized Mitt Romney for “shooting first and aiming later” by speaking about international situation – a statement that is doubly galling considering the fact that Obama himself, rather than learn about facts and threats, blew off his own intel briefing to go fundraise in Las Vegas.

Thiessen writes:

According to the public schedule of the president, the last time the Obama attended his daily intelligence meeting was Sept. 5 — a week before Islamist radicals stormed our embassy in Cairo and terrorists killed our ambassador to Tripoli. The president was scheduled to hold the intelligence meeting at 10:50 a.m. Wednesday, the day after the attacks, but it was canceled so that he could comfort grieving employees at the State Department — as well he should. But instead of rescheduling the intelligence briefing for later in the day, Obama apparently chose to skip it altogether and attend a Las Vegas fundraiser for his re-election campaign. One day after a terrorist attack.

Emphasis added.

Thiessen’s take on this is excellent, and it is worth quoting more here (and even more worthwhile reading the whole column yourself). He continues:

When I asked National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor if the president had attended any meetings to discuss the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) since Sept. 5, he repeatedly refused to answer. He noted that Obama had attended a principals meeting of the National Security Council on Sept. 10 and reiterated that he reads the PDB. “As I’ve told you every time you ask, the President gets his PDB every day,” Vietor told me by e-mail, adding this swipe at Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush: “Unlike your former boss, he has it delivered to his residence in the morning and not briefed to him.” (This new line of defense was echoed this morning by my Post colleague, Dana Milbank, who writes that Bush was briefed every day by his intelligence advisers because he “decided he would prefer to read less.”)

Vietor’s reply is quite revealing. It is apparently a point of pride in the White House that Obama’s PDB is “not briefed to him.” In the eyes of this administration, it is a virtue that the president does not meet every day with senior intelligence officials. This president, you see, does not need briefers. He can forgo his daily intelligence meeting because he is, in Vietor’s words, “among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet.”

Truly sophisticated consumers of intelligence don’t see it as a sign of weakness to “be briefed” by the experts. Most of us, if we subscribed to a daily report on, say, astrophysics, would probably need some help interpreting it. But when it comes to intelligence, Obama is apparently so brilliant he can absorb the most complicated topics by himself in his study. He does not need to sit down for up to an hour a day with top intelligence officials, or hold more than 100 “deep dives” in which he invites CIA analysts into the Oval Office and gives them direct access to the commander in chief to discuss their areas of expertise. Such meetings are crutches this president does not need. Written briefings, questions and comments are enough. Obama has more important things to do — such as attend Las Vegas fundraisers.

He concludes with an apt jab at the president’s absurdly high opinion of his own intelligence and knowledgeability:

When President John F. Kennedy gathered every living American Nobel laureate for dinner at the White House in 1962, he declared it “the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.” Apparently, in this administration’s view, Kennedy had it wrong — the most extraordinary collection of talent and knowledge ever gathered in the White House is when Barack Obama reads his daily intelligence brief alone.

The current president’s actions and failure to plan in any way at all resulted in a Libya and an Egypt in which radical elements are far more free to act, and in which foreign diplomats and property lack even a modicum of reasonably expected security.

The world is burning – and while it does, the President of the United States can’t even be bothered to Fiddle. Instead, he’s too busy fundraising.

COMMENTS

  • ss396

    It would be interesting if the President were tested on the contents of the PDBs. Oh, wait…

  • MiamiDave

    When President Bush stoically continued to read to children after the 9/11 attacks, the Mainstream Media and the left-wing hate machine attacked him constantly and harshly for it. When Obama skips a meeting the day after a U.S. Ambassador was murdered, that same Mainstream media barely gives it any notice.

  • WA_Cowboy

    if he had shown any foreign policy credibility in 3.5 years maybe he’d be cut some slack for reading his intelligence briefings on his own.

    But when you’re flunking Math and skip tutoring you deserve to be skewered. And by all records, he’s flunking foreign policy.

  • Bill S

    Politics ain’t beanbag, Scooter. If you don’t like it, go watch some Nick Jr.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    I suspect the intelligence folks are relieved he does not attend given what Woodward wrote about his inability to act like an adult.

  • Viet71

    I was a collection officer, not an analyst.

    In Viet Nam, we both had stuff on the line.

    Can assure you Obama is clueless about intel.

  • septembergurl

    Politico reports Romney will now be getting regular intel briefings (this is routine post nomination). I believe he will not skip any.

  • corchem

    He had to attend a strategy meeting on how to attack Romney !

    http://www.youtube.com/user/corchem?feature=guide

  • Ausonius

    That BIG BRObama does very little most of the time is a RELIEF! Imagine how bad things would be if he actually believed in working for a living! So much more Surrender and Socialism would already be in place.

    As indolent and inattentive as he is, he has only added 50% to the national debt, ruined our international standing, encouraged Russia and Iran and other enemies to continue against the interests of freedom, surrendered Afghanistan, sabotaged the health-care system, fed the American people hatred and envy, and started a war with the Catholic Church.

    We can only hope that the national and international weeds growing and strangling our flowers of freedom and trying to turn them into a Garden of Evil can be uprooted by the next administration.

  • separatewayz

    Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that he got his intel briefing from “somewhere”. Fine. A deeper question to ask is: why has the president who sold us on “hope and change” been so miserably misdirected on both?

    He’s run a campaign that is as glum, negative, and without hope as we’ve seen in our lifetimes. And his ability to assess the direction and magnitude of change — in both the economic realm, and in foreign policy — has been exceptionally bad. Unemployment? His administration predicted that by the start of 2012-3Q, we’d be at 5.5% unemployment. The magnitude (and even direction) of the “change” has been horribly wrong: so-called “headline unemployment” at 8.1%, with a labor participation rate tied for the lowest in history (63.5%) and one for men that *is* the lowest in history: 69.8%. The “change” has been all wrong.

    Foreign policy? We were led to believe that the “Arab Spring” would lead to the downfall of tyrants and a wave of friendly democracies. Instead, we got jihadist-backed nascent terrorist states across the crescent of North Africa and the Middle East. Again, the President was miserably wrong about the outcome (or even the direction) of the “change” that he advocated.

    Even with a dimwitted simpleton’s slogan like “hope and change”, Barack Obama hasn’t demonstrated any expertise on either score.

  • jag57

    Why would these attacks be a surprise to anyone, since it was headed that way from the time Obama got involved in taking out the leaders of Egypt and Libya.
    This is the way all pincher strategies work, where the group that wants control, whips up discontent in a group of so called rebels; when the leader of the country is gone, they take over. What happens next will be the slaughter of the useful idiots, since they will be of no value any more.

    The Arab Spring was all about bringing radical Islam to power in the Mid East, and North Africa. This is where I drew parallels with December 1961, when, at the behest of the terrorists at the UN, America participated in the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children, in the Province of Katanga, former Belgian Congo, all for the sake of Communism. UN terrorists did not want any part of the former Belgian Congo to escape the terror and oppression of Communism. It didn’t help any that the President of Katanga was a Christian, and the UN terrorists hate Christians.

  • runner12

    This is frankly shocking. I have never been an Obama fan, being a Conservative. But this is beyond incompetence, it is negligence on his part.

  • Melody Warbington

    Yet not surprising. At all.

  • gopcongress

    I like your picture. Here’s another one…
    http://tinyurl.com/92g935d

  • celador2

    Media report always from the Obama point ofr view. He gets a pass on what he does, and he gets a pass for what he does not do too. Even in a crisis Obama is given the kid glove treatment. The trust level by US media is right up there with Pravda and Iranian state TV.
    No need to attend Intel meetings?

  • runner12

    Sorry, but that is a ridiculous conspiracy theory. The truth is just as ugly in its consequences, no need to go this route. The foreign policy disasters we are seeing are a direct result of the Leftist philosophy of Valerie Jarrett and Co. They believe just as strongly as so-called “neo-cons” that the US can be a force of change for “democracy” in the world. The problem with their approach is a). They go in blindly and have no thought for the forces at work in these situations. They are either incompetent or unable to read the situation on the ground. They do not place U.S. interests above all else and tend to have a “utopian socialist” view of these matters rather than live in reality. They are horribly inconsistent in their foreign policy approach to the point where no one knows what our foreign policy approach is. b). They combine this philosophy with the ridiculous notion that we lead through concessions and apologies, instead of strength and leadership. c) They throw our long-standing allies under the bus in order to please our enemies.

    The result? Disaster.

  • mkj350

    I’ve always said that he is in love with the “idea”, “concept” of being president, but doesn’t enjoy the actual work of governing. It’s all about the accolades and the ego trip for him – like the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain – all fake. That governing stuff just kind of gets in the way. Oh yeah, he loves the campaigning part too – the more accolades the better. Shallow. Inept. Incompetent. Help us if he’s re-elected in November.

  • sayoung80913

    If Obama had been in the military or had even a SHRED of experience in the intelligence field prior to being elected, i might cut him some slack about only reading intelligence reports. However, where is the proof that he reads them at all? His words? or his actions? There is only so much you can put into written words that can better be explained in face to face contact. Especially in regards to questions.
    My husband has been literally all over the world, in a lot of the hot spots,etc and he would never be so convinced of his own intelligence that he would just read a few papers and call that good enough. Some of the best generals in history didn’t rely on written intelligence AT ALL, or went month or more long stretches without any, but instead relied heavily on runners who could speak the messages. Hell , the Gauls and Druids didn’t even HAVE a written language, their entire HISTORY was only spoken orally in face to face meetings- and the Gauls with Vercingetorix nearly took out “the world’s smartest man” Julius Cesar. Obama is such a narcissist and so incredibly vain and smug, that he seriously believes HE is smarter than everyone else in the room, in the building, in the city, in the state and the country-perhaps even in the world- no need to tell HIM what is what-he’ll just read the blogs and stew and stew about what people write about him and he’ll damn well get to those “insignificant” intel reports when he chooses.

  • ss396

    Michael Moore especially made a sensation out of President Bush’s seeming seven minutes of immobility. But he was immobile because he was listening to the 10-year old kids read to him.
    I had not known that. It came out in the interviews that they did last year with some of the kids who were in the room with him. The kids recounted how they knew that something was wrong, but were reassured by the President continuing to listen to their reading (while his evacuation was being prepared), and graciously thanking them as he departed. Leadership.

  • noveldog9

    BHO skipped his intelligence briefing. Why not? It was not one of his top priorities. ONE raise money for campaign. TWO get reelected. THREE see to it Moochelle gets to travel with her ladies in waiting. FOUR make sure to get in a couple rounds of golf per week or play basketball or both. FIVE don’t miss happy hour….bring on the Ale King. SIX blame anything that goes wrong on the previous administration, or the GOP. SEVEN get in some photo ops and smile…..the world loves me!

  • spook

    It is my firm belief that Pres. Obama does not run his
    administration rather it is run by a committee of his behind the scene Czars headed by VAl Jarret. I bet they do attend the Intel briefing and this is why Obama feels he does not to attend the briefing.

  • streiff

    I don’t know if Marc can, but I can. The warning you are talking about was a nebulous and monumentally non-specific warning that al Qaeda might strike in the US (as they had twice before, truck bombing the WTC and shooting up CIA workers at the Langley entrance) at some time, at some place, and by some means. The reference to airplane hijackings was in the context of the traditional taking of aircraft and holding it to gain a specific political end. Here the guess was the release of the “blind sheik.”

    There.

    Did you find that helpful.

    Don’t bother trying to reply. You can’t.

  • cbartlett

    Dittos – mkj350
    Since the day he was elected, I said he acts like the popular kid sitting in the teacher’s desk. He enjoys the attention and “fake” authority of being in charge but when it comes to actually knowing enough to teach the class – falls flat on his face. Shallow. Inept. Incompetent. Yes – AND extremely narcissistic.

  • vandalii

    I wonder which of the 57 states he’d be most concerned about?

  • vandalii

    Bush’s was an appropriate “take no action” 10 minutes. “Miss no fundraiser” is *not*.

  • vandalii

    Yeah, didn’t he invent Twitter? Or wait, did Gore invent that one, too?

  • vandalii

    natedogg, what you fail to understand is this is a man who was a community organizer. Note: community, as in small sphere of influence. His actual experience in foreign relations has to do with growing up in other countries, not dealing with delicate matters of foreign policy, negotiations with potentially (and obviously) hostile entities. His time in politics was short in Illinois, even shorter in the Senate. Intelligence reports are well above his experience; he needs tutors and smart people to help him get the picture. “A man who represents himself has a fool for a lawyer” — these things require more than one’s own thoughts and opinions to get it right (assuming he actually digested the information rather than just read it). He apparently did not know how to hire skilled protocol officers or he would know that he, as POTUS, is equal to a Saudi King, should *not* show deference let alone bow. So he really doesn’t get how foreign relations work from what we’ve seen.
    His is a Rodney King approach to foreign relations, “Can’t we all just get along?”. The answer, Mr. President, is no, we cannot while there are forces hostile to our way of life in charge of many countries in the Middle East and Africa. And they keep proving we can’t all just get along with stunts like this. Respect for the USA requires carrying our strength into these discussions and negotiations. Mr. Obama’s approach to diplomacy, like Jimmy Carter’s, has no backbone, no teeth. The day Ronald Reagan was sworn in as POTUS, Iran coughed up our hostages. Jimmy’s approach left them to rot in Iran for more than a year. Now Mr. Obama has let US soil in the form of Embassies be overrun by mobs of irritated locals and has nothing more to say except, “We don’t like it, either”. Nope, he needs to know what is
    As for the Arab Spring and Mr. Obama’s decisions, you must not have been in RedState at the time. None of us thought anything good would come of that nonsense. Clearly no one learned anything from the French Revolution and subsequent Reign of Terror, or they’d've realized where they are is a natural progression after the mob takes down the establishment with no real plan for its replacement.

  • streiff

    he’s dead, Jim