Office of the DNI responds to


February 3, 2010
Statement by the Director of Communications
Arthur House

The article published by Politico today regarding testimony of the Director of National Intelligence before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is inaccurate and irresponsible. The DNI did not criticize the Administration in any way – the assertion that he did is simply wrong.

The DNI stated that the combination of reality and politics regarding the December 25 attempted terrorist attack is surprising and that the Intelligence Community is trying to bring intelligence and law enforcement to bear on those who threaten our country. To suggest that his statement is a “blast” at the White House distorts words clearly spoken and seeks to create a conflict where none exits.

# # #

This is a perfect example of what is wrong with this administration.  Why does it think it needs to even respond to a blog article?  When a government agency weighs in on something like this, it just gives credence to the article itself.  Believe me, I have seen how this works first hand.

As I was recently reminded, the better part of valor is discretion, why Mr. House felt that he needed to “respond” to an article on is beyond me.  Instead of worrying about the public’s perception of their agency, especially when it comes to the blogosphere, this administration, needs to focus on their jobs, which in this case is protecting our country from bad guys.

Bookmark the permalink.

About jim®

James A. Restucci is the author of this blog. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internal License.

3 Responses to Office of the DNI responds to

  1. EagleWatch says:

    They’ve got NASA looking at the weather, it’s only a question of time before they have NSA screening blogs.

  2. TVNews says:

    I want to know why the administration isn’t responding directly to my blog! This is an outrage!

    In all honesty, I think what we are seeing here is sign of the times. As blogs and other web outlets like the Huffington Post get more and more readers and the subsequent influence that goes with that, politicians and government are going to have to start responding to them.

    The same thing happened with Rush Limbaugh in the beginning. At first the Left ignored him. But after a while the things he said on his radio show had to be addressed. It was either that or get voted out of office.

    So of course the Left’s answer was to try to pass the “fairness doctrine” which was also known as the “Hush Rush” bill.

    That’s dealing with it, by golly.

  3. EagleWatch says:

    You’re watching one of the most perplexing aspects of politics. Careful consideration is always given to which incidents need to generate a response – it can be as dangerous to ignore certain events (e.g., Tea Party movement) as it is to engage others. What is interesting in this case is that the defense makes the prosecution’s case – that the administration found “the combination of reality and politics regarding the [crotch-bomber] surprising” is, in fact, a condemnation of the administration’s naiveté. In the midst of a months-long controversy regarding the Mirandizing of terrorists, they question this guy for 50 minutes (during which he is being treated for severe burns and is high on pain-killers) and then lawyer him up – and they are surprised by the resultant uprising?! Incredible.

    They had that same 50-yard stare after people went ballistic when the administration moved the KSM trials to civilian courts in NYC. They are no closer to closing Guantánamo than they were on January 22 2001. They still seem to think we want them to pass their healthcare abomination.

    This is an administration in disarray and it is beginning to show.

    The administration chose a story that only FOX will report on, and then pulled the one segment of the DNI’s remarks that makes the case for administration’s critics.