James Clapper Leaves DNI

There are few people I admire more than James Clapper who had the world's most thankless job at a time when very few people wanted it.  They had good reason.

The Director of National Intelligence sits on top of a huge, splintered group of 16 agencies.  When he took over, he had already had experience with one of them, the National Geospacial Intelligence Agency which was a mishmash of assets from several other agencies.  At least he knew what he was getting into.  Multiply that problem by 16 and you get what I'm talking about.

The Director of Central Intelligence used to run things in the Intelligence Community (IC), and from my experience, that was a better idea.  But, it was Congress that decided in 2010 to add this new function to get better control of the IC.  How you get better control by adding a new office on top of everything else, was a mystery to all, but just look at Homeland Security to see why that idea fails more than it succeeds.

They put together an executor of sorts, gave billets to the office and waited for something to happen.  The Intelligence Agencies did not put the people they loved and wanted into the DNI.  They did what all bureaucratic leaders do - as a general rule, they sent people they wanted to get rid of.  Try managing an office of misfits who aren't used to working together, yet are dealing with Congress on one side, and the Intelligence Agencies on the other.  It could not have been fun, but he did it well.

Each agency has parochial interests and fights for money from the same basic pot, although DoD has two pots and uses them both for the same programs sometimes.  One of the DNI main functions is figuring out the money supply and where it actually is spent.  Not even God can do that on a good day.

Eventually, it worked out better than Congressional leaders could have guessed.  He answered their questions and gave them insight into some of the operations that would be impossible to get otherwise.  Sometimes he did not have the right answer, but he usually gave a truthful one.  He held meetings with the other leaders and got a basic understanding of what his role would be both to help them, and to function in his own role.  He managed to survive in the job when very few others wanted him to.

I worked with a guy who worked directly for him years ago and he said he had to be on top of his game every day to keep up.  He was smart and quick and got quickly to the point.  You had better make sure you had your act together or he would know.  And, he rarely forgot what you told him.  In bureaucracy, everyone assumes you will not remember the last briefing or the last report you made.  You can use the same slides from year to year and just update the numbers.  Those days are gone now.

We should appreciate a man who does his job well when others would like to see him fail.  Not one among those who wished for his failure ever wanted his job.