As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton should be given wide latitude by the president in her hiring decisions, but I have to raise a major warning flag at her decision to nominate Marc Grossman to be the new special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
In a nearly three-decade career at the State Department, Grossman served as assistant secretary of state for Europe and ambassador to Turkey. His last assignment, before retiring from the foreign service in 2005, was undersecretary for political affairs during the first administration of George W. Bush.
You may remember that Marc Grossman was an important character in the Valerie Plame scandal.
In the accounts by the lawyer and associates, Mr. [Richard] Armitage disclosed casually to Mr. [Robert] Novak that Ms. [Valerie] Wilson worked for the C.I.A. at the end of an interview in his State Department office. Mr. Armitage knew that, the accounts continue, because he had seen a written memorandum by Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman.
Mr. Grossman had taken up the task of finding out about Ms. Wilson after an inquiry from I. Lewis Libby Jr., chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.
But that is not what concerns me. What concerns me are the allegations that former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds made about Grossman. Here you can see the central claims detailed in this January 6, 2008 UK Sunday Times excerpt:
Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.
Among the hours of covert tape recordings, she says she heard evidence that one well-known senior official in the US State Department was being paid by Turkish agents in Washington who were selling the information on to black market buyers, including Pakistan.
The name of the official – who has held a series of top government posts – is known to The Sunday Times. He strongly denies the claims.
However, Edmonds said: “He was aiding foreign operatives against US interests by passing them highly classified information, not only from the State Department but also from the Pentagon, in exchange for money, position and political objectives.”
In 2009, Brad Friedman confirmed that the unnamed official in this UK Sunday Times article was Marc Grossman.
Grossman was specifically identified as a ring-leader in a very broad espionage scandal — which includes the theft and sale of nuclear weapons technology to the foreign black market — in a series of front-page exclusives by the UK Sunday Times in early 2008 (the stories can be found here, here and here). At the time, though the paper clearly identified the official in question, they didn’t name him outright due to British libel laws. One of the co-authors of the series, Joe Lauria, has since confirmed the official in question was, indeed, Grossman.
Now, these allegations were not made by Sibel Edmonds alone. As detailed at The American Conservative, former FBI Counterintelligence and Counterespionage Manager John Cole “publicly confirmed the FBI’s decade long investigation of the former State Department Official Marc Grossman.”
“I read the recent cover story by The American Conservative magazine. I applaud their courage in publishing this significant interview. I am fully aware of the FBI’s decade-long investigation of the High-level State Department Official named in this article, Marc Grossman, which ultimately was buried and covered up. It is long past time to investigate this case and bring about accountability…”
Now, I want to be clear that Marc Grossman was never charged with anything and that he is certainly innocent until proven guilty. His continued advancement at the State Department certainly means that his loyalty to this country is trusted by people in positions of responsibility. However, if it’s true that he was withdrawn early from his position as Ambassador to Turkey because of his ties to the Susurluk Scandal, I don’t want him anywhere near Afghanistan’s poppy fields. For more on that, see the this interview with Sibel Edmonds.
Now, going back to Hillary Clinton, the Washington Post reports:
According to one candidate who discussed the job with Clinton, she was looking for someone with the stature to speak for both her and President Obama to Congress and foreign governments. Some in the White House, this person said, wanted someone with a more traditional diplomatic background whose duties would be restricted to representing the administration in the region…
…Two potential candidates – Nicholas Burns, who served in the same job as Grossman in the second Bush administration, and Strobe Talbott, deputy secretary of state in the Bill Clinton administration – were thought to be too closely identified with U.S.-India relations to serve as viable interlocutors with Pakistan.
Others on the list included Frank Wisner, the former U.S. ambassador to Egypt, and John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s White House chief of staff.
So, again with the Wisner family, and again with nothing but Clinton retreads with lots of baggage.
Obama needs to take the reins here. If he doesn’t, he’s going to get embarrassed repeatedly.
What the f–k is wrong with Hillary? She’s MUST be being “run” by someone. There are certainly other candidates for the position besides nasty spooks with questionably allegiances/histories who will most likely create some embarrassing scandal to cover up.
Change, please.
“Obama needs to take the reins here. If he doesn’t, he’s going to get embarrassed repeatedly. “
Just like with that shit budget he proposed.
Jesus. Any opportunity to knock the guy, no matter how off topic.
i work in a nonprofit and I’m angry.
Sorry. I stop taking opportunities to knock the guy when he stops taking opportunities to knock the people we serve.
I’m the fundraising chair on a couple of nonprofit boards. One’s a young adult homeless shelter; the other is a community land trust that preserves affordable housing. Both have operating budgets of under $1 million annually. They serve, respectively, the very poor and the working class poor. (I’ve also worked as an ED or Development Director for several nonprofits over the years.)
While Obama’s cut might affect the bottom line of foundations that in turn provide grants to some types of nonprofits, it won’t have much direct impact on our clients. The vast bulk of our individual giving, including major donors, come from people who are not in that uppermost tax bracket. Any number of development studies have shown that as a percentage of income, lower, middle and upper middle income folks donate a lot more than the truly wealthy. Added to that, the types of charities the very wealthy give to rarely involve direct services to the poor. I see a lot more gifts to the symphony or alumni funds than to us.
Brendan, in my frustration with many of Obama’s policies I’m closer to you than to Booman, but I gotta give him a pass on this one. As a way to raise desperately needed revenue from the tax bracket that can afford it most, this would seem to be relatively painless and have a good chance of passing. A lot of the rest of his budget sucks, but this, meh.
You’re against eliminating line itemized deductions for the rich?
This is not a bug, it’s a feature.
I do believe you are on to something.
“Like.”
So Grossman is the replacement for Holbrook. Who are the ambassadors in Afghanistan and Pakistan?
These appointments seem to be made on the fact that the envoy knows certain key people well enough to get candid information out of them. A shady past is seen as an asset, and indeed it might be so long as one is clear who these people are.
The job of the AfPak envoy is to manage the relationships with the local institutions that are coordinating the elimination of al Quaeda and the establishment of security in Afghanistan. Having someone like Grossman allows the ambassadors to deal more broadly with a wide range of civil society groups. Clinton seems to be strong about strengthening civil society capabilities as ways of dealing with the issues in countries that become grievances against the government.
There is another reason that Grossman might have been chosen. He might be viewed as easily confirmable in the Senate. Are Senate Republicans likely to raise his shady past in order to frustrate Obama again? If they do, they will have to own up to his role in the leaking of the information about Valerie Plame. The political calculation seems to be that the GOP will let him through.
Having taken this step, Clinton needs to take other steps to make sure that he does not embarrass the administration as Wisner did.
In other words. This creep is so dirty that he can be told what to do, or else?
explain.
Grossman deals with Petraeus, Karzai, Zedari, the Pakistani military and ISI.
The ambassadors deal with the civil society groups that might transform both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
My thought is a variant of the analysis that the division of labor in the Egyptian crisis was the Wisner dealt with Mubarak and the ambassador was able to establish ties with the civil society groups who understood what was going on.
He’s so dirty that he knows and understands what the people like Karzai, the ISI, Pakistani military, and Zedari are up to. Hopefully, unlike Wisner, he will put country first. It’s a gamble Obama seems willing to take.
Off topic:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/14/plouffe-obama-social-security-benefits_n_823247.html
He better keep his word.
I’m thinkin Joe Wilson, Marcy, & Jane will be giving Hillary a call.
It goes without saying that anyone up for this position comes with a certain amount of baggage, certainly Holbrooke did, but with Obama’s penchant for chasing down loose nukes Grossman’s connection with them would be enough alone to stop the nomination.
Certainly the International Crisis Group would be a better resource to find a candidate.
Boo:
I know this is getting into the weeds but this isn’t surprising. She, along with Bill, were the Great Hope for the DLC. Remember, Bob Graham(no DFH, he!!) told her to read the NIE as it related to Iraq because there were serious doubts about Bush’s case for war. And she never apologized for her vote either. And you think she’s gonna change her stripes now? Not only that but look what kind of people they surround themselves with. Carville. Mark Penn. I could go on but you get my point. They don’t even want to pick the right people.
I have to stop commenting about Hillary CLinton. I just want her out of there and now.
She and Bill have always surrounded themselves with shady types.
I thought the president chose the envoy, not Clinton.
No. The president would have to step in and veto Clinton’s selection, which would cause quite a rift, I imagine. Of course the buck stops with him, so he owns this appointment.
Thanks for telling me that. I thought so, but wasn’t sure.
When CLinton first camreintot he State Department, she apparently chose fformer Admiral (hope I’ve got the title right) to be envoy to Iraq.
There was a good NYT article about this.
Jim Jones called Zinni and told him he was chosen and to go see Clinton. Joe Biden congratulated Zinnie in a phone call.
Zinni was involved with some sort of contract in Iraq as he was a civilian now and he had supported Clinton in the primaries.
Zinni went to State and Clinton said that his paperwork should be expedited.
Zinni heard nothing and then he called Jones and Jones told him that Christopher Hill had been nominated for Iraq by Obama.
The WH said at the time that they didn’t talk about appointments.
Zinne expressed his anger to the press.
I do wonder if the rift is there since the Egypt foul up by Clinton. I get the sense that she is trying to get attention and is also competing with Obama.
The President seems to be a “give them enough rope and see what they do” sort of guy anyway. Wisner used it to hang himself publicly. It’s an interesting way of clearing deadwood (if you structure it so the appointee’s actions don’t result in serious damage).
I suspect that it’s up to Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to pull the plug on this appointment. I have described above why I think they will not.
Grossman will have to work with Petraeus and Karzai to accomplish the President’s objectives of being able to begin withdrawal by August 2012 and complete it by 2014. That task in itself puts some accountability in the assignment.
Just remember, at this point Hillary Clinton no doubt wants to be remembered by history as the US Secretary of State who unwound several serious US foreign policy mistakes – the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the “Global War on Terror”™.
To me all you need to know about Clinton’s approach to American Empire was her nickname on the Senate Armed Services Committee: “Madame Yes.”
I do not trust that woman. Ever. And her ambition never, ever stops, just like her husband.
And she calls some middle eastern countries: Front Line States.
Sounds like Empire to me. Should we give them a number?
So…what do you folks reasonably expect of the PermaGov? Do you think it will suddenly see the moral light and stop using alla them dastardly tactics to keep y’all in cold beer and chips? Keep yer cars and heaters running and yer kids fed? Without somehow totally exploding the economic imperialist system that supports your American (what we laughingly refer to as) “lifestyles?”
Yer dreamin’.
The best hope we have of surviving the next 20 years or so without a total, economically-based meltdown of the Western European, North American, Japanese and Australian societies is a gradual backing off of the feed trough so’s the rest of the world begins to get some sort of parity.
What H. Clinton and B. Obama…and yes, even spooky spook spooks like F. Wisner and M. Grossman and literally hundreds of thousands of PermaGov apparatchiks who never evermake the news…are doing is trying to make that adjustment w/out a collapse.
Are there Madoff-like hosers (only much, much bigger) simply bogarting every financial joint they can stick in their various orfices?
Sure.
Let’s hang a few.
But not the “necessary” ones.
Who chooses?
The heads of the PermaGov. Always a temporary position, y’know. Like CEOs of large corporations. The profit goes down, they get changed. But the corporation remains. Or alternatively…it founders and another corp takes over. Y’wanna live under say ChinaCorp? Or MuslimCorp? (It could happen…) I don’t.
So go flay these lousy hustlers like Hillary if you wish to do so.
But do not do it while continuing to suck down the goodies that they provide.
None of them.
Outta your suburban house/urban apartment. Outta them good grocery stores. Turn in yer cars and start walking/biking. Get as close to energy zero as you can get and still survive. Then complain.
I dare ya.
I fuckin’ dare ya.
AG