"liberal bloggers had mounted a campaign against him judging he'd been tainted by his service in the CIA at a time when the agency was using coercive interrogation methods"No, what the "quaint" liberal bloggers like Glenn Greenwald rejected was Brennan's on the record (News Hour & CBS News) support for
Gjelten then cites "several intelligence professionals and analysts interviewed by NPR, including Democrats" to suggest that liberal bloggers are against "anyone who served at the CIA during the Bush years." That is simply ridiculous. What Gjelten doesn't ask is whether anyone who actively supported (or quietly went along with) Bush's torture, kidnapping, illegal spying, and "fixed" intelligence programs should now lead US intelligence agencies. On the contrary, he turns to just such a disgraced CIA figure , John McLaughlin (can you say destroyed torture tapes?) to bolster the case for handing over US intelligence to just such people. McLaughlin states:
"Whoever steps into these positions has to be well prepared, schooled in the business, savvy about the world and have excellent judgement about how to proceed. In fact thinking back over recent transitions I would say that more than in any transition in my memory and I've served eight presidents there will be less time for on the job training this time around than at any previous moment."And just what "well prepared, schooled in the business, savvy about the world and...excellent judgement" folks was old Number 2 McLaughlin working with from 2000 to 2004? I guess he means all those super-smart, perky folks who missed 9/11 coming, fixed intelligence for the Iraq war, and were setting up enhanced detainee hotels in Guantanamo, Bagram, and Baghdad!
I just keep wondering how stupid NPR thinks its listeners are...