America In Crisis and POTUS Won’t Lead: Former Officials Seem “Scared,” Worried,” “Alarmed” (Video)

Former Obama CIA Director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has been making the media rounds promoting his book, Worthy Fights: A Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace – seen by many as an attempt to inoculate Hillary Clinton (and himself) from Obama’s disastrous foreign policies.

In an interview described as “devastating” to Obama, Tuesday night,  he shared his thought’s with Bill O’Reilly on what he perceives to be the president’s lack of leadership on the world stage.

Following the interview, O’Reilly had Charles Krauthammer on the Factor to discuss what was said. Dr. K said that “even though his tone was measured and restrained,” the content of the interview was “utterly devastating” to the president.

He was basically saying this president cannot lead. He is indecisive and he is weak” Krauthammer declared.

He added “what was so interesting is, it wasn’t even in the discussion that Iraq or Afghanistan, but this won’t even be reported, but the thing he said about Ukraine where he just sort of he laid out what should be done…and he said this just outright, you said, ‘why doesn’t he do it?’ He had absolutely no answer.”

Krauthammer concluded “it’s not just indecisiveness and how tentative Obama is, but it’s also how political he is. Remember when Gates, Bob Gates wrote his book, he talked about how the decision-making about the surge in Afghanistan and then leaving in Afghanistan was essentially dictated by the political types in the white house, and you get the same thing in the Panetta book about Iraq. He knew we had to leave troops in Iraq. It is one of the worst decisions ever made by this president.” And “it was the political nature of that [the withdrawal from Iraq] that, I think, is the biggest indictment of Obama, where he put the White House concerns about the political partisan fortunes of the president above the national security of the country.”

Former White House Press Secretary under President Bush, Dana Perino, appeared on the Kelly File Tuesday with Megyn Kelly to discuss the interview which aired right before her show.

Calling it a “scathing” interview, Kelly noted that he is the third top Obama Cabinet member to openly criticize the president’s decision-making –  first Former Defense Chief Robert Gates, then former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, and now former Defense Sec. Leon Panetta.

Kelly and Perino were struck by the undercurrent of worry and alarm present in these former top officials’ books.

Perino noted that all of them have said in their books that they gave Obama advice and he went the other way. She wanted to know “if they felt so strongly at the time that politics was trumping people, then why didn’t they resign on principle?”

Kelly said Panetta seems “scared” and “genuinely worried.”  She added, “he seems to be trying to telegraph to us that he’s very concerned about the man sitting in the Oval Office right now.”

Even former president Jimmy Carter (the 2nd to worst president in American history) is harshing on Obama’s mellow:

Via TIME:

Former President Jimmy Carter has criticized the Obama administration’s handling of the crisis in the Middle East and the growing threat of the Islamic State, joining a growing list of the president’s allies who are scrutinizing his strategy in Syria and Iraq.

In an interview with the Fort Worth, Tex. Star-Telegram published Tuesday, Carter said the U.S. had waited too long to respond to the growing power of the Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) extremist group, which also goes by the name Islamic State.

“We let the Islamic state build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” Carter said. “Then when [ISIS] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

The White House sent out political hack Bill Burton – not to discuss Panetta’s criticisms on the merits – but to verbally attack him with childish name-calling taunts.

The White House dispatched long-time Obama hack Bill Burton to smear Panetta.

Via TWS:

A former spokesman for President Barack Obama, Bill Burton, went on CNN last night to unload on the president’s former defense secretary and former CIA director, Leon Panetta. Burton is upset about some of the things Panetta wrote in his memoir, which hit shelves yesterday, and called the long-time public servant “sad,” “dishonorable,” “small and petty.”

The RNC couldn’t have done a better job proving Panetta’s point that this White House is unserious and overly concerned with petty politics to the nation’s detriment.

Linked by Maggie’s Farm, thanks!

14 thoughts on “America In Crisis and POTUS Won’t Lead: Former Officials Seem “Scared,” Worried,” “Alarmed” (Video)

  1. “…he has courage…”??? Seriously??? To what? Play another round? Give another speech to a room full of sycophants?

    This is a punk who has all his life escaped many & much needed ass kickings by sweet talking his way out of them. Now, that ain’t flying and all the Jarrett working his lips isn’t going to cut it.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) - Riverside Daily Digest

  3. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) - San Diego Daily Digest

  4. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) - Dallas Daily Digest

  5. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) - Seattle Daily Digest

  6. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) | Paul Revere Press News

  7. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) - San Antonio Daily Digest

  8. Pingback: Dana Perino Poses The Question The Media Should Be Asking Leon Panetta (Video) | Biblioholics

  9. I am no fan of B’ore and frequently hammer him. Having said that, last nights interview with Panetta was one of his finest. He continually push Panetta and tried to draw out a answer to some very serious questions. It’s amazing how valuable a interview can be when a person is allowed to answer a question from the interviewer. The interview was deadly to Boy Wonder, even while Panetta was trying to soften some of his responses. He {Panetta} threw the Hildabeast a few lifelines during it, but coming from a dyed in the wool Clinton loyalists, It was expected.

    I’m sure all of us could compile a list of several more questions that should’ve been asked, but overall it was a solid interview for the good guys and devastating for the regime. It just confirmed what many of us have known all along.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Pingback: Thursday morning links - Maggie's Farm

  11. No doubt it is true that Obama makes decision on the basis of his political fortunes rather than the national interest but in that regard he differs little from past presidents. Harry Truman was advised by foreign policy heavyweights like George Marshall and George Kennan to stay out of the Arab-Jewish conflict in the Middle East. His political advisors told him that he needed to get involved to secure the Jewish vote. Truman did not hesitate long in making his choice between the national interest and his political fortunes.

    Bill Clinton bombed an aspirin factory tin the Sudan to distract attention from a domestic sexual scandal. People who hold power do what they need to do to further their hold on power and climb the status-power heirarchy. The notion that the “national intgerest” has much to do with their actions is a fairy tale.

    Like

  12. Jim, that’s a pretty interesting case that you are suggesting about Harry Truman. Not really known for making political decisions that were popular or not in the national interest. Of course, in hindsight and decades later I’m sure a case could be made to support your position to a certain extent, but I’m not sure it would not have been very popular at the time. After a four year war, a holocaust and a movement {depending on your suggested timeline } in the United Nations to establish the Jewish State of Israel { 1948 }, I’m not really sure a “political fortune” decision argument would hold water.

    On the other hand your example of Bill Clinton is a perfect argument for your case that I would totally agree with. I think the “political fortune” decision making is mostly a new phenomenon that certain politicians have mastered and taken to unforeseen levels. Clinton certainly would fall into this category and volumes could be filled over the current regime dear leader, who I feel has never made a decision about anything with the “National Interest” in mind. His have always been agenda driven to promote a un-American cause and fill his buds pockets with fortunes period.

    Call me crazy but I have never felt that weather vanes, wet fingers, dart boards and polls should ever be used in determining serious matters, especially ones that pertain to “National Security” or Americans lives. Of course when those decisions are made, mistakes will be made and the ultimate motives and decisions will always be questioned but, that is a far cry from making those decisions from the beginning from a straight political slant.

    Like

  13. Truman’s decision to involve the US in the Arab-Israeli conflict went against the virtually unanimous advice of the US foreign policy establishment at that time. His decison had nothing to do with disagreeing with their judgement that such involvement was not in the long term national interest of the US but rather reflected his political judgement that such involvement wuold be politically advantageous to him in winning Jewish support..

    Like

  14. Well then, I guess so, if you say so. To the elimination of every other possibility?
    {a Wikipedia reference is sure to follow}

    Like

Leave a comment