Mukasey; Panetta had a “highly lawyered” memo to protect Obama if the raid had failed
Chief Tango sends us a link to the Daily Caller which reports from the Hannity Show that former U.S. Attorney Michael Mukasey reveals that Leon Panetta, then CIA director, had a memo drafted that would have absolved the President of any blame if the bin Laden raid had failed for some reason;
“There was a memo from Leon Panetta that described the authority that was given to McCraven,” Mukasey explained. “And it was to proceed according to the risks, only according to the risks that had been outlined to the president. And if he encountered anything else, he had to check back. And you better believe that if anything else had been encountered and the mission had failed, then the blame would have fallen on McCraven. That’s what that’s about.”
Remember the note that Eisenhower drafted before the D-Day invasion, the one in which he took complete blame for what might be a failure? That’s because that’s what a real leader does.
On top of that revelation, our buddy, Aunty Brat has the story of an actual Navy SEAL’s open letter to the President asking him to stop taking credit for the operation. You should read it.
Category: 2012 election, Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War
Too little, and too late.
We’re not getting pertinent information soon enough to make informed decisions. If this information had come out right after the raid, the cause-and-effect factor would have linked the two (the raid and the memo) in people’s minds. Obama would not have been able to take credit for the raid like he is doing now. As it is…now this just sounds like sour grapes.
@1: Who says this information was available at that time?
FWIW: Anyone that has more than 3 working brain cells knew/knows that Obama had little to do with anything to do with the raid, other than saying “go”. That he was willing to throw others under the bus if it had gone to shit shouldn’t surprise anyone, either. He has proven that throughout his life; if it’s a negative, it’s someone else to blame. If it’s a positive, he’s front and center to take the credit and accolades. IOW He’s a POS politician from Chicago.
OT: if there was an actual, physical memo written, it was “available” the minute it was sent to its recipient. Whoever knew about it sat on it. You mean to tell me, in the world of “anonymous sources” that we had to wait a year to hear about this?
I do agree with you on the part about “anyone that has more than 3 working brain cells…”
Well ya Obama is a politician and former college professor, who is really surprised ?
Except that he was never a college professor. He was a guest lecturer. No big deal. Really. Even I have been a guest lecturer in a college class.
Just one of many things about him that has been slightly embellished.
Why is Mukasey commenting on something he quite obviously knows nothing about? The memo does nothing of the sort that Mukasey [or Hannity] would like to believe it does. A risk profile is presented to the President, who approves the mission based on the profile presented and allows the operational commander the latitude to execute the mission within those parameters.
That’s what the memo lays out.
I recommend Sharing Success Owning Failure by David L. Goldfein, Colonel, USAF. Here’s a link to the free pdf: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/au/goldfein.pdf
CI, Jonn: Actually, here I have to disagree somewhat with both of you. I read Panetta’s memo as a written CYA for himself and the CIA, to be used in the event things went wrong and folks starting point fingers at the CIA.
Having said that, the distinction between that memo and Ike’s draft message for release in the event D-Day went bad is indeed striking.
@Hondo – I agree with the stark wording between the two memo’s, but then we haven’t seen anything like the Ike memo…..since the Ike memo.
Interesting theory about the Panetta angle, but the wording is still appropriate enough and typical enough that I’m not sure that case can be made.
CI: suit yourself. To me it seems pretty clear that Panetta’s memo was designed to document the following:
1. the POTUS was briefed on the risks;
2. the POTUS gave a conditional OK, provided nothing changes from what’s expected;
3. Admiral Raven was given the final call on execution; and
4. if anything chages, brief the POTUS and ask the POTUS for another decision.
What it doesn’t say is quite interesting. It conveniently omits who who briefed the POTUS on how bin Laden’s location was determined and how the risks associated with the operation were determined – both of which his agency (CIA) presumably was deeply involved in producing.
In short, it appears to me to document only those things that the CIA would need to absolve itself of blame for an operation that went south, while conveniently omitting what the CIA did to contribute towards the “go” decision. Pretty slick, IMO.
@Hondo – I haven’t disagreed with you on points 1-4, and thought I had pretty much said the same thing.
The memo that Mukasey references is Unclass – and would have zero reference to the sources and methods you say are omitted.
Granted most of us here have a negative view of the president, but he has not shown the ability to take the blame in failure in many situations. Now is it a huge stretch of the imagination that he would have something in preparation in shit happened? I don’t think so, just judging by his character.
CI: Correct – and that’s exactly what one would expect if the point was to produce an unclassified personal MFR that would be (1) publicly releaseable, and (2) would tend to exonerate the CIA and it’s director in the event the Abbottabad raid went bad. A MFR (or personal notes) intended to document the events for the CIA’s official records concerning the situation would almost certainly contain more info, and would be expected to be highly classified. That’s what leads me to believe this was Panetta’s attempt at CYA for both himself and his agency in the events things went bad.
@Hondo – I’m not dismissing your theory…it’s just rather difficult to know what Panetta’s underlying intentions may have been. He may have been thinking of the lasting sting that the ‘slam dunk’ had 10 or so years ago.
Mr. Smith (US NAVY SEAL) has written a wonderful letter !!
The Complete letter is here:
http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles/2012/20120507007-navy-seal.html
Having a CYA memo to cover one’s legal bases is not a big deal. Bush had legal opinions written to cover interrogation. And we know lawyers’ opinions are like sphincters: ubiquitous and full of crap.
Leon Panetta should have a vote of no confidence done in the House. What a coward and ahole
Haha, note to the Daily Caller: it’s McRaven not McCraven.