Brennan at CIA fills 3rd key national security job

March 8, 2013 @ 8:15 am


| Zoom

WASHINGTON (AP) - John Brennan took over Friday as director of the CIA, the finishing touch on President Barack Obama's national security team for his second term.

The White House said Vice President Joe Biden swore Brennan in during a private ceremony in the Roosevelt Room, the morning after he won Senate confirmation amid a contentious debate. Republicans had blocked his nomination but lifted their delay after the administration bowed to their requests for clarification about the president's power in using drones.

Last week Chuck Hagel won Senate confirmation to be defense secretary, joining Secretary of State John Kerry in Obama's revamped second-term lineup.

With Obama in attendance but media excluded, Brennan took the oath from Biden in the Roosevelt Room. Rather than swearing on a Bible, Brennan placed his hand on an original copy of the Constitution from 1787 that had George Washington's handwriting and annotations on it. He told Obama he requested the document from the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law, an administration official said.

The Brennan vote was 63-34 and came just hours after Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a possible 2016 presidential candidate, used an old-style filibuster of the nomination to extract an answer from the administration on the drone question.

Brennan won some GOP support. Thirteen Republicans voted with 49 Democrats and one independent to give Brennan, who has been Obama's top counterterrorism adviser, the top job at the nation's spy agency. He replaces Michael Morell, the CIA's deputy director who has been acting director since David Petraeus resigned in November after acknowledging an affair with his biographer.

The confirmation vote came moments after Democrats prevailed in a vote ending the filibuster, 81-16.

In a series of fast-moving events, by Senate standards, Attorney General Eric Holder sent a one-paragraph letter to Paul, who had held the floor for nearly 13 hours on Wednesday and into Thursday.

"It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: `Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" Holder wrote Paul.

"The answer to that question is no."

That cleared the way.

"We worked very hard on a constitutional question to get an answer from the president," Paul said after voting against Brennan. "It may have been a little harder than we wish it had been, but in the end I think it was a good healthy debate for the country to finally get an answer that the Fifth Amendment applies to all Americans."

However, Paul's filibuster of the Brennan nomination roiled the GOP, with Republican leader Mitch McConnell, libertarians and tea partyers rallying to the freshman senator's side and military hawks such as John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina arguing that Paul's claims were unfounded.

The government's drone program and its use in the fight against terrorists were at the heart of the dispute.

Though Paul held the Senate floor for the late-night filibuster, about a dozen of his colleagues who share his views came, too, to take turns speaking for him and trading questions. McConnell, a fellow Kentuckian who faces re-election next year, congratulated him for his "tenacity and for his conviction."

McConnell said in Senate remarks on Thursday, "The United States military no more has the right to kill a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil who is not a combatant with an armed, unmanned aerial vehicle than it does with an M-16."

Paul's filibuster echoed recent congressional debates about the government's authority in the anti-terror war and whether the United States can hold American terror suspects indefinitely and without charge. The disputes have created unusual coalitions as libertarians and liberals have sided against defense hawks.

The latest GOP split also underscored the current rift within the rank and file over budget cuts, with some tea partyers willing to reduce defense dollars to preserve tax cuts but longtime guardians of military spending fighting back.

During his talkathon, Paul had suggested the possibility that the government would have used hellfire missiles against anti-war activist Jane Fonda or an American sitting at a cafe. During the height of the Vietnam War, Fonda traveled to North Vietnam and was widely criticized by some in the U.S. for her appearances there.

McCain derided that notion of an attack against the actress and argued that Paul was unnecessarily making Americans fear that their government poses a danger.

"To somehow allege or infer that the president of the United States is going to kill somebody like Jane Fonda or somebody who disagrees with the policies is a stretch of imagination which is, frankly, ridiculous," McCain said.

McCain found himself in the odd position of defending Fonda's constitutional rights over her July 1972 trip to Hanoi that earned her the derogatory nickname "Hanoi Jane."

"I must say that the use of Jane Fonda's name does evoke certain memories with me, and I must say that she is not my favorite American, but I also believe that, as odious as it was, Ms. Fonda acted within her constitutional rights," said McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam for 5 1/2 years. "And to somehow say that someone who disagrees with American policy and even may demonstrate against it is somehow a member of an organization which makes that individual an enemy combatant is simply false. It is simply false."

Graham expressed incredulity that Republicans would criticize Obama on a policy that Republican President George W. Bush enforced in the terror war.

"People are astonished that President Obama is doing many of the things that President Bush did," Graham said. "I'm not astonished. I congratulate him for having the good judgment to understand we're at war. And to my party, I'm a bit disappointed that you no longer apparently think we're at war."

___

Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Richard Lardner and David Espo contributed to this report.


(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
More National News
Top Stories

  • Devastation
    Oklahoma City tornado kills at least 50, dozens of kids missing

  • Twister Terror
    Gallery: Deadly Oklahoma tornado

  • Messiest
    New lane restrictions mean Mercer Street is tough to travel during afternoon commutes
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (14)


  • Add A Comment

  • hnuh wrote...
    The important essence of
    February 7, 2013 8:18 am
    the "legal" reasoning is this: High level administration officials have the authority to order the murder/assassination/killing of American citizens without due process. This is the fundamental of the memo, all the conditional words are vague and therefore not definitely binding to the meaning of this "legal" reasoning. 0bama! Fundamentally changing America since 2009! Thanks a bunch. Not. No squalling from the left though(caring, compassionate, morally superior beings that you are). Can't waterboard them but by golly you can blow them up when and where ever you want.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CldWtrSrf wrote...
    Yeah,
    February 7, 2013 11:13 am
    And Obama is STILL torturing prisoners, but the "left" is all for torture now that it's "their" guy instead of Bush. Disgusting. Too bad all the so called "conservatives" are JUST as much a bunch of hypocrites. They now are against all this stuff that Bush was doing just because Obama's doing it now or taken it to a whole new level. If it had been Bush blowing children and women and innocent civilians with drones they would have loved it. DISGUSTING!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cigarfan wrote...
    @CldWtrSrf
    March 3, 2013 1:40 pm
    What are you smoking?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • calapete wrote...
    I don't know who this "left" is that supprts torture and drone attacks.
    February 7, 2013 2:23 pm
    I get it that you are sore that draft dodging, woman hating, white power tax cheat lost the election, but that doesn't excuse violating the Geneva Convention.

    The Left, if I may speak for them, were outraged when Bush lead us into illegal wars, outraged that Bush tortured and set up Guantanamo and are equally as outraged that Obama is still doing this today.

    BUT, the Left is smart enough to know that Romney sure as heck wasn't about to stop drones either. He would do it while slashing medicare, overturning Obamacare and giving himself and his cronies lots of no bid contracts to rebuild Iran.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    calapete? - this 'left' is known as
    February 7, 2013 4:12 pm
    Barack Obama
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    Ahhhhh Yes
    February 7, 2013 6:27 pm
    Another pathetic, intellectually bankrupt, stunningly pointless, post for the liberal hypocrite....Calapete. What a tool.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CldWtrSrf wrote...
    The Left, if I may speak for them, were outraged when Bush lead us into illegal wars, outraged that Bush tortured and set up Guantanamo and are equally as outraged that Obama is still doing this today.
    February 7, 2013 7:25 pm
    Oh really? Show me again all the outrage? Just for the record numbnut5, Romney would have been NO different than Obama, just like Obama is EXACTLY the same as Bush...they are all OWNED by the same Masters. Don't forget all the illegal wars that Obama is getting America involved in there buddy. Technically "Bush's Wars" weren't illegal as you all love to say. They were APPROVED by Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike. I still think they were/are WRONG, but I'm not an asslicking sycophant that can't think for myself either. Obama doesn't even go to Congress before blowing a country up. Obama TOLD Congress that they don't have power over the Military, that Obama gets his directives for use of Military Force from the U.N. and NATO, which used to be called TREASON and was punishable by trial and execution by hanging. I don't know calapete, maybe you are ignorant to all the drone strikes going on in Pakistan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Mali, Algeria, Yemen, Libya and who knows where else? Maybe you don't consider murdering innocent civilians and children and Act of War? I doubt it though. Most likely you LOVE that Obama is doing all this, because it makes you feel like a "winner" because he's supposedly "your" guy, but if it was Bush doing the exact same thing, you would be freaking out. Can't you see how SICK that makes you?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Rangerhawk wrote...
    Dear saltpeter,
    February 7, 2013 11:26 pm
    There's no such thing as an illegal or a legal War, Waterboarding was not torture until after the "trick" was exposed, and the genius of Guantanamo Prison lives on. And yes, were all for drone strikes on any and all of these yahoo's as counter-terrorism is concerned, it's just fun to point out the liberal hypocrisy (absence of real outrage). ps How's that Libyan hope & change thing workin out?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • longwayhome wrote...
    maplecarp
    February 7, 2013 6:59 pm
    Cal too smart for you! Must resort to insults when brain stops making up excuses. (republican motto)
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CldWtrSrf wrote...
    "a failed attempt to down a Detroit-bound airliner"
    February 7, 2013 7:15 pm
    Oh yeah, that one guy that eye witnesses report looked drugged up out of his mind, could barley stand and was put on the plane by a quote "sharp dressed man". That underwear bomber? You mean the same guy that Senate Hearings later confirmed was requested and given a passport by an "unnamed" alphabetic agency, even after being strongly urged to deny it from another agency? Oh yeah, that guy with the firecracker in his underwear that caused the TSA to search for Osama Bin Laden in my pants and shoes, and paved the way for those people to make BILLIONS of dollars off of Cancer giving Microwave Machines that were already manufactured and waiting for the "right crisis" to be installed. I can't believe how STUPID the American public is. I wonder how long until Obama or the next President starts firing Hellfire Missiles on American Soil, because some scary guy with a cowboy hat said he didn't like some policy or another, or didn't pay his taxes?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    Now Boys and Girls[xxxcop] if you look in the main ring
    March 3, 2013 7:11 pm
    under the GOP circus tent - you will see the MAIN CLOWNS Lindsey Graham and John McCain! Ring of Fear; 2 Ring Circus! Mittens couldn't make it for the three Ring Circus! But she is on Fox Noise!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • murr wrote...
    Another drone in the white house
    March 5, 2013 12:02 pm
    For sure if the vote was 12 to 3, He has no integrity. Follow the leader.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • longwayhome wrote...
    paul rand
    March 6, 2013 6:52 pm
    Is the poster child for the reason why the republicans continue to lose every election. He is not doing the republicans any favors, it is an immature, unprofessional attempt to prevent something that will happen anyway. These people are on OUR payroll, we pay their wages! If you republicans are O.K. with one senator wasting his time doing nothing for however many hours it takes to prove you are a fool, then he's your boy. Good luck in 2014.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • hnuh wrote...
    03-08-2013 Brennan....
    March 8, 2013 8:17 am
    Brennan NEVER SAID American citizens would not be subject to assassination/killing/murder by executive fiat in or out of this country. In so failing, Brennan violates the oath of office prior to assuming that office. Constitutional rights are NOT OPTIONAL.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }