I don’t think you have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out what is going on here. You’ve had three leaks of intelligence that paint the president as a strong leader. I don’t think it’s an accident that you have three stories within about 45 days that paint the Obama administration as being effective in the war on terror at our national security detriment.
What’s amazing to me about this is that the outrage is over the leaks (and their political consequences), not the fact that the president (and his predecessor) unilaterally ordered a cyberattack on another country. Dennis Kucinich seems to be the only one pointing this out.
This is a delicate issue since the Pentagon’s own cyber strategy holds that “computer sabotage coming from another country can constitute an act of war.” At what point does executive control over covert activities cross the line? Is it good enough to brief just a few friendlies in Congress (and then swear them to secrecy)? Those are the question we should be debating.