Brennan: Republicans Playing “Political Football” On National Security

February 08, 2010  |  Posted by Danielle Belton

It's about time someone said it. National security has become just another political wedge issue for Republicans to score points on.

Sunday on Meet the Press, White House officials continued their push back against Republican fearmongering on the would-be Christmas Day underwear bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Counterterrorism chief John Brennan went on the record and scolded Republicans for their overly political response to terrorism.

From Politico:

"There's been quite a bit of an outcry after the fact," Brennan said. "I'm just very concerned, on behalf of counterterrorism professionals throughout our government, that politicians continue to make this a political football, and are using it for whatever political or partisan purposes. ... I think those counterterrorism professionals deserve the support of our Congress. And rather than second-guessing what they're doing on the ground, with a 500-mile screwdriver from Washington to Detroit, I think they have to have confidence in the knowledge and the experience of these counterterrorism professionals."

Here are the facts: On the day the bombing attempt occured, four Republicans, leaders in the House and Senate, were briefed that Abdulmutallab was in the custody of the FBI. These Republicans included Obama Administration critics Rep. Pete Hoekstra (who sits on the House Premanent Select Committee on Intelligence), Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, House minority leader John Boehner and Sen. Kit Bond, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Their first concerns were NOT about Miranda Rights or whether or not Abdulmutallab should be sent off to Guantanamo Bay. They didn't demand he be placed in military custody instead. They didn't demand anything.

Yet weeks after the incident, Republicans are busy politicizing how our law enforcement does its job.

"None of those individuals raised any concerns with me, at that point," Brennan said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "They didn't say, 'Is he going into military custody? Is he going to be Mirandized?' They were very appreciative of the information. We told them we'd keep them informed. And that's what we did."

"I explained to them that he was in FBI custody. That Mr. Abdulmutallab was in fact talking, that he was cooperating at that point. They knew that 'in FBI custody' means that there's a process then you follow as far as Mirandizing and presenting him in front of the magistrate."

Ever since the White House and Department of Justice did the obvious thing and followed the rule of law after apprehending Abdulmutallab, Republicans have been up in arms, exclaiming that the rule of law makes us less safe. That Miranda Rights are like Red Bull and magically give terrorists the wings to skirt interrogation -- even though the Bush Administration followed the rule of law when faced with their own foreign, wannabe airplane bomber in "the shoe bomber," Richard Reid.

But everything about what right wingers have done since the attempt have reeked of political gamesmanship. The right's politicization of the incident began quickly with the first attacks being on the President's response to the bombing and have only recently shifted to attacking law enforcement. McConnell didn't begin his attacks on Miranda Rights until mid-January.

Now we have McConnell penning critical letters to the Department of Justice and insulting the FBI's ability to interrogate terrorists. He claims Larry King would be a better interrogator. Hoekstra was among the chorus of politicians decrying terrorists being tried in New York courts and using the Christmas Day bombing to scare the public into thinking our law enforcement isn't capable of handling terrorists (even though we've prosecuted and convicted 195 terrorists since 2001 and our prisons presently hold more than 300 terrorists). He claimed that we'd lost valuable intelligence because Abdulmutallab was read his rights ... even though the FBI recently reported that Abdulmutallab is cooperating, talking and giving up useful information.

Naturally, those who have worked counterterrorism aren't too enthused about McConnell and crews maligning of the FBI in order to get an uptick in the polls. Ex-FBI interrogator Jack Cloonan has been especially vocal about the latest conservative chorus of "the FBI is too weak to handle terrorism." Cloonan's response? “They just don’t know what they’re talking about. They really don’t.”

From the Washington Independent:

“People keep talking about Mirandizing as if it’s a preventive measure, getting someone to shut up, but most critics have never been in position have to Mirandize one,” Cloonan said. “It’s to keep pristine information you’ve already gotten and to have a prosecutable case. It’s not the end of an interview.”

“A lot of people make big a deal out of Mirandizing Abdulmutallab, thinking he’ll clam up and will never talk,” Cloonan said. “What’s gonna work, over the next several weeks, is a bit of gamesmanship. Here’s what we’re looking for — from both the FBI and the attorney — and the U.S. Attorney in Detroit will say this is what he’s got to do. They’ll put together a proffer agreement outlining what his obligations are.” If it comes out that Abdulmutallab “exaggerated or lied about any of it, then it’s void.”

But trust our law enforcement? That's a bridge of common sense too far for most right wingers. Afterall, playing politics is their favorite past-time. What's in it for them, politically, to support the rule of law and let law enforcement do their jobs? Nothing – and that’s the point. They learned years ago that fear works. Not to mention attacking Democrats as WEAK on national security. Senator Scott Browns’ campaign attack line that we should be paying for weapons to fight terrorists rather than lawyers to defend them was a home run on the campaign trail. Pollsters report it scored. So, Republicans are looking for any opportunity to cash in on the attack politically regardless of what it means for our law enforcement officers, the law or our Constitution. Do you think maybe that’s why Sarah Palin got into the act by using this very same poll tested argument at the so-called “Tea Party” convention in Nashville over the weekend?

In a case of "Oh-No-The-Truth-Is-Making-Us-Look-Bad," Hoekstra and company are now all complaining that Brennan's assessment was unfair. That they didn't know from the briefing that Abdulmutallab would be "Mirandized." Of course, they KNEW he was in FBI custody and they were AWARE of standard legal procedures done everyday by our law enforcement. Or, at least I would hope they would know that our law enforcement officials always read everyone their Miranda Rights because that's the law. Otherwise, well, what are they doing in government trying to write laws? But playing dumb is a nice attempt to get around the fact that what was just dandy under the Bush Administration is suddenly not good enough when Obama is in office.

A point not missed by President Obama himself.

From the New York Times:

"The most important thing for the public to understand is we're not handling any of these cases any different than the Bush administration handled them all through 9/11," the president said in an interview with CBS. "They prosecuted 190 folks in these Article Three courts," referring to civilian courts. "Got convictions. And those folks are in maximum security prisons right now. And there have been no escapes."

Hypocrisy -- Hoekstra, McConnell, Bond and Boehner are your names.

blog comments powered by Disqus