When it comes to intelligence briefings, Obama isn’t even voting ‘present’
Marc Thiessen asks a good question in the Washington Post today: Why is President Obama skipping more than half of his daily intelligence meetings?
Writes Thiessen:
Clint Eastwood re-enacts a scene from the president's daily intelligence briefings. (AP Photo)
President Obama is touting his foreign policy experience on the campaign trail, but startling new statistics suggest that national security has not necessarily been the personal priority the president makes it out to be. It turns out that more than half the time, the commander in chief does not attend his daily intelligence meeting.
The Government Accountability Institute examined President Obama’s schedule from the day he took office until mid-June 2012, to see how often he attended his Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) — the meeting at which he is briefed on the most critical intelligence threats to the country. During his first 1,225 days in office, Obama attended his PDB just 536 times — or 43.8 percent of the time. During 2011 and the first half of 2012, his attendance became even less frequent — falling to just over 38 percent. By contrast, Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush almost never missed his daily intelligence meeting.
Thiessen relays a comment by a spokesman for the National Security Council, who points out that Obama still receives the information from the briefing daily. But, as Thiessen points out, the administration has portrayed Obama’s participation in these meetings as evidence of his deep “exploration of foreign policy and intelligence issues.” That’s rather at odds with the reality that he skipped almost 700 of these meetings in three and a half years.
And, of course, we would like for our president to get into just such an exploration of these issues with his resident experts on foreign policy and intelligence. Thiessen cites former security officials who say the meetings are an important way for Obama and his security advisers to ask questions of one another. When the president isn’t there, that isn’t happening.
This is certainly of a piece with the reporting from Bob Woodward’s latest book that “gaps” in presidential leadership mean, at times, “no one is running Washington.”
Of course, attending these meetings would make it harder for the president to fulfill one of his other priorities in, ahem, unprecedented fashion.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
394 comments Add your comment
Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American
September 10th, 2012
3:02 pm
Obozo: Laziest pResident ever.
Kyle Wingfield
September 10th, 2012
3:03 pm
To everyone who thinks this is a lousy article: Why did the White House go out of its way to get a puff piece on how engaged Obama is at these meetings — you don’t think that WaPo columnist just wandered into the briefing room while on a tour, do you? — when he’s skipping well over half of them? That’s the main point here: An image-conscious White House that produces an image completely at odds with reality.
Kind of like running around touting the GM bailout when investors have pushed its share price down by about one-third since it was re-listed (the S&P is up by almost 20% over that same period of time) and the company is selling so few of its most politically important cars, the Chevy Volt, that it’s losing tens of thousands of dollars per sale and is idling the factory that makes Volts for the second time this year. Oh, and when the company still owes taxpayers billions.
LOL
September 10th, 2012
3:05 pm
Aquagirl says “He’d be ineffective”. sorta like he is now……anybody recall the budget he sent over to congress and it pulled an 0 for? Ineffective is a gross understatement as to what he would be.
InAtl
September 10th, 2012
3:06 pm
Kyle, they don’t like it when you point out instances where our “leader” isn’t leading and call pointing it out “silly.” I guess having back-and-forth discussions and listening to others’ points of view in important meetings just isn’t necessary to this president or his backers. Not terribly surprising though.
LOL
September 10th, 2012
3:07 pm
Kyle:
You never will please the Bookmanites on this blog…..Obama hung the moon for them and if you say something against their “project” then you are scum of the earth (amongst other things they will refer to you as).
BW
September 10th, 2012
3:10 pm
Kyle
You’re grasping for straws on this….no friggin way you can spin this into a Romney positive after all these terrorists have gone down. All Romney has to do to win is what Joe Scarborough says…be a real conservative and present real concrete conservative ideas
Gravy Train
September 10th, 2012
3:11 pm
Ask Yemen how active the President is in foreign affairs. We have helped them crush the Al-Qaeda faction in Yemen with the use of drone and ground attacks. The Yemen army supplied the troops. Amazing, huh? Not one US tank or troop was deployed.
Kyle, you and your party are stuck with the clandestine plutocrat. Take your lumps like a man. No matter how many of you slander or outright attempt to obstruct the President, he will be re-elected. Your mud slings are not sticking with anyone other than your decrepit base. What the GOP once was is dead. Now you have a small group of plutocrats armed with billions to dump on nothing but smoke and mirrors used to distract and deceive an aging, shrinking base.
Back Seater
September 10th, 2012
3:11 pm
He was probably attending a Jobs Council meeting
@@
September 10th, 2012
3:12 pm
Aquagirl:
It gets tiresome watching you leftists flip flop on your “principles”.
When Bush was authorizing airstrikes, the left was outraged. Heck, even Senator Obama was outraged.
“We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”–Barack Obama Aug. 2007.
His airstrikes are killing innocent civilians and children.
I’ve always accepted collateral damage as a part of war.
But you leftists? My oh my, how things have changed.
southpaw
September 10th, 2012
3:13 pm
Thanks, Aquagirl @2:58.
LOL
September 10th, 2012
3:17 pm
Gravy Train….How appropriate a moniker……I would hazard to guess they are receiving some bennies from Mother Government’s teat……
H.E. Pennypacker
September 10th, 2012
3:19 pm
To everyone who thinks this is a lousy article: Why did the White House go out of its way to get a puff piece on how engaged Obama is at these meetings — you don’t think that WaPo columnist just wandered into the briefing room while on a tour, do you? — when he’s skipping well over half of them? That’s the main point here: An image-conscious White House that produces an image completely at odds with reality.
I would say they are trying to get ahead of any potential campaign issue likely to be the fodder of conservative columnists rapidly trying to change the subject from a failed convention where the electorate is rapidly moving away from them.
I like the fact that a Presidential team sees a threat like this and tries to get ahead of it……as opposed to a President that reads “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US” and instead decides to cut back the Texas brush so he can see him coming.
My question is do you honestly think that his reduced attendance is increasing the risk to the United States?
@@
September 10th, 2012
3:19 pm
The troll
Is it any wonder he/she can only dream about sex?
Just Saying..
September 10th, 2012
3:20 pm
Good topic choice, to deflect from which parts of Obamacare are your favorites for Romney to keep…
Aquagirl
September 10th, 2012
3:22 pm
Kyle, you have mistaken physical presence with interaction. I don’t care how many meetings GW Bush attended, he made crappy decisions based on the information presented to him there. Listening to all points of view and making thoughtful decisions is an effective meeting. Sitting there twice as often with your mind already made up is not. If you can’t tell the difference, look at the results. That might help you get it.
Centrist
September 10th, 2012
3:25 pm
I am supporting Romney based on Hope and Change from record deficits, added debt, crony capitalism, nationalized healthcare, and class warfare. But that is not to say it will actually get better under Romney – maybe just a different set of problems and cronies being rewarded.
The good news if Obama is re-elected – the Republican Congress will quickly make him a lame duck and will not pass greater spending, nationalize anything else, increase taxes, and might even tackle the outrageous spending/ debt problem which a lame duck might even go along. It doesn’t matter to me which cronies are rewarded by a kleptocracy.
LOL
September 10th, 2012
3:26 pm
Results, Aquagirl…..Please do tell of the “results” of the past 4 years in foreign affairs.
WOW
September 10th, 2012
3:28 pm
My question is do you honestly think that his reduced attendance is increasing the risk to the United States?
They can and will try to say it, but there is no actuall proof of it, which is why silly articles like lack of attendance at a meeting are used.
@ Aquagirl 3:22
Well said!
BW
September 10th, 2012
3:29 pm
Aquagirl
The “conservatives” only can this deflection when “libs” do it LOL….BS needs to be called out regardless of the side…Marc Thiessen wrote BS to deflect from the fact that Mitt is banking on another economic collapse to win at this point though it might help if he would unequvocially stated where he was on issues. With whoopers like I’ll keep parts of Obamacare and the derision of defense cuts his VP candidate voted for I can see why Kyle and his ilk have heartburn right now. You can’t beat something with nothing no matter how bad that something is.
BW
September 10th, 2012
3:29 pm
can should be call in the first sentence
JDW
September 10th, 2012
3:32 pm
@Kyle…”Why did the White House go out of its way to get a puff piece on how engaged Obama is at these meetings ”
Maybe you need a Daily Briefing Kyle, see your “puff piece” source CLEARLY states….
Each president has had his own style of dealing with the PDB.
Let me say that again because you must have missed it the first time around…
Each president has had his own style of dealing with the PDB.
For example…
“Jimmy Carter read it after listening to highlights and other information from his national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Carter then sent notes on the PDB to Brzezinski.”
“Ronald Reagan let his national security advisers brief him on it, then asked questions”
“Bill Clinton read it ahead of time, but early in his career he canceled the briefing when he believed that the PDB taught him nothing new and that he had more important budgetary matters to handle.”
George H.W. Bush was briefed on it and, as a former CIA director, often stretched the meeting to discuss how information had been obtained.”
“George W. Bush read the PDB as he was being briefed, asking questions along the way.”
“Obama reads the PDB ahead of time and comes to the morning meeting with questions. Intelligence briefers are there to answer those questions, expand on a point or raise a new issue.”
Clearly ALL President’s do it different and the big thing is the end result. You know the stuff Obama has excelled at delivering. Maybe that is just a touch more important than justifying to you how he chooses to manage his time.
Truth Squad
September 10th, 2012
3:33 pm
The truth is that President Bush did not “keep us safe”. September 11 happened on his watch after a PDB asserted that an attack was likely. You cannot start the “safe” clock after a disaster.
I know one thing:Mitt Romney doesn’t think giving our troops a mention is important.
Thankfully, President Obama will continue on to another term and will continue to take out terrorists. The previous administration was great at torturing, this administration is great at tormenting the terrorists. They are scared now and on the run. They no longer have a sense of invulnerability. President Obama has done such a great job on this issue that it no longer is among the top concerns of voters.
Mitt Romney is going to lose. Joe Scarbrough this morning said what our squad has been saying now for over a year:”in presidential races, you can’t beat something with nothing”! If Republicans do not change their ways and stop pandering to the types that come here and write hateful dismissive comments, they will find they are not going to win the presidency for a good long time.
@@
September 10th, 2012
3:34 pm
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, facing a teachers strike, is backing away from fundraising for Democratic super PACs.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/80988.html#ixzz2664wkKrg
Priorities Chicago Students.
It’s obvious they’re not the teachers’ priority.
Auntie Christ
September 10th, 2012
3:35 pm
Kyle Wingfield
September 10th, 2012
3:03 pm
To everyone who thinks this is a lousy article: Why did the White House go out of its way to get a puff piece on how engaged Obama is at these meetings — you don’t think that WaPo columnist just wandered into the briefing room while on a tour, do you? — when he’s skipping well over half of them? That’s the main point here: An image-conscious White House that produces an image completely at odds with reality.
******************************************************************************************
looks like “everyone who thinks this is a lousy article” have touched a nerve, kyle feels the need to defend himself. A legitimate criticism of the Prez would need no defense, but apparently he feels this piece of triviality requires a defense. The defense tho, is as trivial and petty as the original piece.
kyle says: “Why did the White House go out of its way to get a puff piece on how engaged Obama is at these meetings” This implies that respected journalists can be pressured by those in power to write fluff pieces touting a politico’s strength. But this then implies a respected “journalist” like kyle can be pressured to write a hit piece also. Is kyle saying the profession of journalism has lost it’s integrity, or is he just speaking from his own experience? Inquiring minds want to know.
kyle seems to put a lot of stock in bob woodward, which reinforces the point I make above. While he is one of the heroes of Watergate, woodward has become nothing more than a repub mouthpiece, with his fluff book on bush, the wartime President, in control and running a tight ship, when in fact the whole gang of them were being duped by “curve ball” and Chalabi with their fairy tales of being greeted as liberators, and the yellow cake uranium hoax. Because wingfield and woodward are little more than cheerleaders for the right, they imply that a respected journalist like Walter Pincus is likewise, simply because he writes a positive poiece on Obama.
Aquagirl
September 10th, 2012
3:39 pm
@@, I think you’re with Kyle in not understanding EFFECTIVE vs. INEFFECTIVE. You kill a lot more noncombatants with the spray and pray approach. They also get the idea you don’t know what the hell you’re doing.
And who are “the leftists?” I never got my membership card for that organization, if you want to discuss vague groups living in your head I’m not much help there.
Kyle Wingfield
September 10th, 2012
3:43 pm
Auntie Christ: No nerves struck, but I try to answer my critics. Whether you like the answers is up to you.
As for what you perceive me to be saying about journalism, either the profession or my own: The linked piece speaks for itself. When you see me writing a piece from inside Gov. Deal’s offices about how he comes to all his (totally awesome!) decisions, feel free to call me out on it.
Lynnie Gal
September 10th, 2012
3:43 pm
Obama has enough intelligence to get Osama Bin Laden and the Libyan Ghoul without American casualties. Romney says Russia is our greatest enemy and wants to intervene in Syria. I trust Obama with our national security. What (ahem) national security does Romney have?
H.E. Pennypacker
September 10th, 2012
3:44 pm
Kyle,
I know how you like to keep people on topic, but there was a guy that went off topic posting some rant against the Chevy Volt at 3:03 you might want to investigate. Tell him to fess up that he completely misread the national conventions and is currently engaged in diversionary tactics.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
September 10th, 2012
3:46 pm
JFM by your blackberry/computer comment, I can tell you have never handled classified information. It may appear on an approved computer, whose hard drive is removed and locked in an safe at night. It is never transferred over public wireless airwaves. Before Obama, it was treated as special sensitive information restricted severely on a need to know only basis. Now, Obama reveals some of our secrets whenever he thinks he needs some good pub.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
September 10th, 2012
3:52 pm
Ill bet if Obama was handed a briefing titled.
Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US
He would have taken it seriously.
Obama followed the worst President in History who took more vacations than any President in history and this is all you can come up with.
This is why you are losing.
H.E. Pennypacker
September 10th, 2012
3:52 pm
Rafe, thank goodness you are on the case, I heard President Obama left his Blackberry at a Five Guys last month and now the Russians know all of our secrets.
I also wish we had a better security protocol like the last administration that outed a CIA agent that did not agree with their policies and constantly leaked Iraqi information to Judy Miller at the New York Times.
@@
September 10th, 2012
3:55 pm
Aquagirl:
Protestations are emanating from the countries where airstrikes are taking place. The same happened under GWB with one difference.
When GWB was running things, the left claimed the airstrikes were fomenting hatred against the U.S..
They went so far as to claim we were CREATING terrorists.
I remember it well.
Now…under Obama?
They’re all in with silent approval.
schnirt
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
September 10th, 2012
3:55 pm
meno
I’m inclined to think that when you are officially on the clock your responsibility begins
I’m sorry my post went over your head meno. I actually agree with the statement you made above. So, we both agree that Obama is responsible for the economy he has been trying to fix for the last 3.5 years. He is on the clock, when not on the golf course or basketball court, so his responsibility began on 20 Jan 09 at about 1:00.
Michael H. Smith
September 10th, 2012
3:56 pm
The only reason these leftwing-hacks think the article was lousy is because it reveals their phony outrage over Bush missing a meeting, Kyle. So let them dance in circles and spin like tops, you’ve done what everyone on the right should be doing by pointing out their sanctimonious double standards and a President who has been more interested in campaigning than doing the job he was elected to do.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
September 10th, 2012
3:56 pm
Now watch this drive!
- George W Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3p9y_OEAdc
The former Commander in Chief. While American servicemen where dying on the battlefield.
A Battlefield he sent them into… based on lies…with no idea how to get them out or end the war.
What has the Grand Old Party become ?
Holy Moly!
September 10th, 2012
3:57 pm
LOL
September 10th, 2012
3:05 pm
Aquagirl says “He’d be ineffective”. sorta like he is now……anybody recall the budget he sent over to congress and it pulled an 0 for? Ineffective is a gross understatement as to what he would be.
Let’s try this whole budget thingy ONE MORE TIME, and listen up ya’ll -
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/apr/06/mitt-romney/romney-says-obama-failed-pass-budget/
Back to the headlines, do you not find it AMAZING how Osma is dead and Obama doesn’t even attend intelligence meetings. WOW, not calling you shirley but SURELY you can come up with something better than this guys.
They BOTH suck
September 10th, 2012
3:57 pm
Numerous polls indicate Obama doing well on the issue of national security.
This is an attempt to change what both sides are seeing in these polls to see if Romney (Republicans) can get that edge back on this topic. As well as the fact that Obama received a larger post convention bump than Romney.
Had to run an errand and turned it on Hanitty. He was on a roll regarding this very issue. He is great for some laughs, I tell you.
Li'l Aynie
September 10th, 2012
4:01 pm
Avoidance of meetings (unless your boss makes you attend) indicates good sense! Meetings are boring and waste time; a smart person save hours of valuable time by reading the minutes of the meeting, rather than attending.
Auntie Christ
September 10th, 2012
4:03 pm
Kyle Wingfield
September 10th, 2012
3:43 pm
As for what you perceive me to be saying about journalism, either the profession or my own: The linked piece speaks for itself. When you see me writing a piece from inside Gov. Deal’s offices about how he comes to all his (totally awesome!) decisions, feel free to call me out on it.
******************************************************************
Indeed, I will call you on it, and I expect that sometime in the future some repub politico will call upon you to write a fluff piece from their office, and you will dutifully comply. I believe this to be true because I, like probably every other commenter here, left or right, sees “journalists” today to be nothing but lap dogs, slanting their coverage to whatever ideology they subscribe. None of you,have any integrity and none of you are interested in informing, instead proselytizing is the priority.
Kyle Wingfield
September 10th, 2012
4:03 pm
H.E. @ 3:44: Romney went from being down 1.4 points (in the Real Clear Politics average) on the day before the RNC to being tied on the day before the DNC began. Obama went from tied to up 2 points as of today. A week passed in each case. A few points:
1. We’re still a week or two away from knowing whether the conventions had any real, durable impact.
2. There’s not much difference between 2 points and 1.4 points in this kind of exercise.
3. As I noted in the post to which you’re referring, I left open the possibility that Obama would neutralize any gains by Romney by making his own base more enthusiastic. Without access to cross-tabs for those polls (I don’t subscribe to Rasmussen, which screens for likely voters and might indicate greater enthusiasm), we can’t say whether that’s what’s happening. (As I was typing this, a new poll from CNN came out that seems to confirm this explanation.)
I also wrote in that post that the conventions won’t decide this election. There’s no evidence so far to the contrary.
Michael H. Smith
September 10th, 2012
4:03 pm
Except when Bush doesn’t attend them?
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
September 10th, 2012
4:04 pm
I also wish we had a better security protocol like the last administration that outed a CIA agent that did not agree with their policies and constantly leaked Iraqi information to Judy Miller at the New York Times.
Yep, the late Richard Armitege (sp), whatever post he held, outed a CIA employee (not a working agent) to a reporter, Bob Novak. Not the same as revealing our sources and methods of obtaining information, before this, one of the worst national security infractions, short of giving or selling classified information to an another foreign government (i.e. Bradley Manning).
Obama, no secret is safe, if he needs the info for publicity. When you have a lousy record of accomplishment, you have to get favorable pub, where ever you can.
southpaw
September 10th, 2012
4:05 pm
Li’l Aynie – next time you’re in a meeting, remember the definition of “meeting;” an event in which the minutes are kept and the hours are lost.
Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American
September 10th, 2012
4:09 pm
Obozo not showing up for intelligence briefings. School teachers putting their own greed ahead of student learning.
These Chicago punks sure are worthless and lazy.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
September 10th, 2012
4:10 pm
sees “journalists” today to be nothing but lap dogs, slanting their coverage to whatever ideology they subscribe. None of you,have any integrity and none of you are interested in informing, instead proselytizing is the priority.
Auntie, hint, they never were objective. Long ago, we didn’t know any better, as the conservative side was never told. Now that we have talk radio, Fox News, internet, the other side gets out and you can compare the two stories and see the spin on each side. We were in the dark, for unbiased info, for many years, prior to the dawn of the new media.
Cherokee
September 10th, 2012
4:10 pm
Kyle you can do better than this. I did a search for the Government Accountability Institute – and found, among other things, their facebook page. It has all kinds of links to things like NewsMax, the Heritage Foundation, Breitbart, and of course all the goofy attacks on AG Eric Holder.
You posting this nonsense as fact would be equivalent to some lib posting an article from Daily Kos and expecting you and the cons to accept it as fact.
Ain’t gonna happen.
Michael H. Smith
September 10th, 2012
4:12 pm
The conventions won’t decide this election and neither will any of the political polls.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
September 10th, 2012
4:12 pm
W hen you have a lousy record of accomplishment, you have to get favorable pub, where ever you can.
Ask Osama who he would rather have been President ?
Ask him about Obama’s record.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
September 10th, 2012
4:14 pm
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html
Obama + 6 in the latest poll.
Newsflash. The debates aren’t exactly going to help Romney either.
We all know the election isn’t today.
But that being said. Would you rather be the one leading in all the polls ?
Or the one behind ?
Michael H. Smith
September 10th, 2012
4:17 pm
Oh here’s a thought Kyle, write a lot of real fluffy articles. Maybe it will drive these Democrats back to their Daily Kos.