Mike Isikoff’s piece in this week’s Newsweek fleshes out details related to rumors I blogged a couple of weeks back regarding the probability of future public hearings to examine Bush Administration misconduct and the possibility of legal charges being filed against outgoing officials. The former sounds likely to happen in one form or another–the latter, not so much.
While I appreciate Mike’s work on this subject, his failure to perform due diligence on one aspect of his reporting is a big disappointment. Regarding the issue of public hearings, he writes:
The idea of such panels is not universally favored among Obama advisers. Some with ties to the intelligence community fear the demoralizing impact on intelligence officers, said one source who had discussions with Obama aides about the idea.
The strength of Isikoff’s reporting has always led me to assume he had an extensive network of contacts inside the intelligence community. But his failure to place this single source’s account within a larger and more meaningful context makes me wonder.
The truth is that morale within the CIA hit a nadir 3-4 years ago–a loss of confidence in its purpose from which it has yet to recover. Regarding this passage in Isikoff’s story, it’s not entirely clear whether his source is pushing this notion to the transition team, or if the source is merely relaying what Obama aides are saying.
Either way, Isikoff should know better than to accept this idea at face value without surveying his supposed CIA sources for their actual views on Agency morale. This kind of hearsay should be junior league for a journalist of Isikoff’s caliber.
If Mike had surveyed a healthy cross-section of CIA officers, what would they have told him? I’ve talked to a few myself, so can give you a good idea.
They would have reminded him how the Bush Administration created a competing analysis unit, the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans headed by Doug Feith, in order to undermine CIA reporting that did not fall in line with the President’s and–more importantly–the Vice President’s policy objectives.
They would refresh his memory about the CIA “war” against the White House–a PR construct Bush officials created to discredit valid criticisms being lobbed by retiring and resigning top officials.
They would remind him of sound CIA intel product ruling out any operational relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq being rejected by the White House, about selective leaking of NIEs, about political retribution launched against career officers, about the steady stream of resignations and retirements resulting from disgust with how the CIA was being misused, about the Agency being held as a scapegoat for any and all intel failures regarding Iraq, despite the many warnings and cautions Bush officials had patently ignored. I could go on….
I suppose so much of the disillusioned and dejected old guard has left the Agency over the past 4-5 years that many newbies may possess a fresh morale that could be impacted by public debate the kind of hearings under discussion could engender. But that’s because they did not endure the darkest days of the Bush Administration.
Isikoff, however, has been covering this story since the beginning. He should know better.