Who will take the rap for the FBI's Moussaoui investigation SNAFU?

[december]

FBI Agent Colleen Rowley’s 13 page letter blamed FBI senior Washington officials and a particular FBI Supervisory Special Agent for blocking the investigation of Moussaoui:

. So I think it’s very hard for the FBI to offer the “20-20 hindsight” justification for its failure to act! Also intertwined with my reluctance in this case to accept the “20-20 hindsight” rationale is first-hand knowledge that I have of statements made on September 11th, after the first attacks on the World Trade Center had already occurred, made telephonically by the FBI Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) who was the one most involved in the Moussaoui matter and who, up to that point, seemed to have been consistently, almost deliberately thwarting the Minneapolis FBI agents’ efforts (see number 5). Even after the attacks had begun, the SSA in question was still attempting to block the search of computer, characterizing the World Trade Center attacks as a mere coincidence with Misseapolis’ prior suspicions about Moussaoui.
<snip>
5) The fact is that key FBIHQ personnel whose jobs it was to assist and coordinate with field division agents on terrorism investigations and the obtaining and use of FISA searches (and who theoretically were privy to many more sources of intelligence information than field division agents), continued to, almost inexplicably, throw up roadblocks and undermine Minneapolis’ by-now desperate efforts to obtain a FISA search warrant, long after the French intelligence service provided its information and probable cause became clear. HQ personnel brought up almost ridiculous questions in their apparent efforts to undermine the probable cause. In all of their conversations and correspondence, HQ personnel never disclosed to the Minneapolis agents that the Phoenix Division had, only approximately three weeks earlier, warned of Al Qaeda operatives in flight schools seeking flight training for terrorist purposes!

Nor did FBIHQ personnel do much to disseminate the information about Moussaoui to other appropriate intelligence/law enforcement authorities.

The NY Times brought in the name David Frasca:

The senators, who released a copy of the letter to news organizations, asked Mr. Mueller to explain how the head of the bureau’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit, David Frasca, dealt with the information from Minnesota and Phoenix.

My hope is that we will have all the real answers PDQ, but it may be fun to guess in the meantime:

[ol][]Who in the FBI will take the rap?[]Is it a bum rap? Or merely malfeasance? Or a “see-no-evil” attitude? Or something more sinister?[]Which past and present FBI heads will be blamed?[]Will John Ashcroft or Janet Reno be found at fault?How about Bush and Clinton, or even Papa Bush? Will any of them be found at fault?[/ol]

[Duckster]

There will be investigations and hearings, but at the end of the day, people way down in the food chain will get stuck with the rap, if at all. No former head of the FBI, Attorney General or even a former President will be found at fault because that’s not the way Washington works.

Quite a bit will depend upon what other events will become more newsworthy, either with the assistance of the movers/shakers and/or the events themselves taking on lives of their own.

My cynicism shows because at the end of the day the average American could care less, unless it hit them in the nose. When you have a population well on the way to becoming sheep, there is no strong pressure to get to the truth about much of anything anymore.

The Beltway Mentality will continue as always because the rest of the country is too lazy to demand anything requiring effort.

[Duckster]

There will be investigations and hearings, but at the end of the day, people way down in the food chain will get stuck with the rap, if at all. No former head of the FBI, Attorney General or even a former President will be found at fault because that’s not the way Washington works.

Quite a bit will depend upon what other events will become more newsworthy, either with the assistance of the movers/shakers and/or the events themselves taking on lives of their own.

My cynicism shows because at the end of the day the average American could care less, unless it hit them in the nose. When you have a population well on the way to becoming sheep, there is no strong pressure to get to the truth about much of anything anymore.

The Beltway Mentality will continue as always because the rest of the country is too lazy to demand anything requiring effort.

[elucidator]

It was a dark and stormy night. The peasants were in an ugly mood, armed with torches and pitchforks, they moved on the castle.

Inside, they’re measuring Director Muellar for his martyr suit. He is sobbing uncontrollably. The Leader moves forward and pats his shoulder in a comradely fashion.

“There there, Muley…”

“Don’t call me that! I hate it when you call me that!”

“…it’s all for the best. Gotta be somebody. Can’t be me, can’t be the Powellster…”

“Why not! Why not him!”

The Leader looks confused for a moment, then Dr. Rovenstien leans over and whispers in his ear.

"Well, he’s Secretary of State, Paul. "

“It’s because he’s black, isn’t it!? This is some kind of affirmative action thing…”

“Well, that’s part of it, sure. Gotta have one black on the cabinet, even if he is a bit wimpy about bombing stuff…”

“What about Condoleeza Rice? She’s almost as black as Whitney Houston, isn’t she?”

The Leader knots his brow in concentration, turns to the Dr. R.

“She is? When did that happen, Karl?”

“Born that way, sir. They all are.”

By this time, they have herded the Director to the balcony. They crowd spots him and howls for blood. “Blood!” they howl.

They move him closer to the edge, the Leader has wandered off to ask Laura if that’s right, that they’re born that way. Son of a gun, he whispers, shaking his head. Don’t that beat all.

[december]

The New York Times blames an incident that occurred during the Reno/Freeh period.

The bureau’s reluctance to press new applications for national security search warrants stemmed, some officials believe, from an incident late in the Clinton administration.

In the fall of 2000, the seven judges on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in Washington summoned Attorney General Janet Reno to their secure courtroom. The judges, in a letter signed by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth, had complained to her of a serious breach. Misleading affidavits had been submitted to the court, which approves warrants to eavesdrop on people suspected of being foreign agents or international terrorists. At the meeting, Ms. Reno agreed that the problem was serious, the officials said.

All of the flawed affidavits had been submitted by Michael Resnick, the F.B.I. supervisor in charge of coordinating the surveillance operations related to Hamas, the militant Palestinian group. The judges said they would no longer accept applications from Mr. Resnick.

In response, the F.B.I. director at the time, Louis J. Freeh, ordered a broader review of the eavesdropping applications — including those related to Al Qaeda. That review, the officials said, turned up disturbing signs that Al Qaeda applications were also flawed.

For Mr. Resnick, who had been a rising star in the bureau, the complaint from the judges and especially their refusal to have him appear before them again was a blow to his career that angered some of his colleagues. Ms. Reno turned over the complaint to the department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which is still investigating Mr. Resnick.

Intelligence officials said the event resulted in making the bureau far less aggressive in seeking information on terrorists. Other officials said the Resnick case prompted bureau officials to adopt a play-it-safe approach that meant submitting fewer applications and declining to submit any that could be questioned.

Times columnist Wilima Safire blames the Ashcroft/Mueller regime for a continuing effort at cover-up.

Why did F.B.I. Director Robert Mueller desperately stamp “classified” on last week’s memo to him from the Minneapolis agent and counsel Coleen Rowley?

Answer: Because he is protecting the bureau’s crats who ignored warnings from the field before Sept. 11, and because he is trying to cover his own posterior for misleading the public and failing to inform the president in the eight months since.
<snip>
Intimidated by the brouhaha about supposed ethnic profiling of Wen Ho Lee, lawyers at John Ashcroft’s Justice Department wanted no part of going after this Arab. F.B.I. Washington bureaucrats were, in agent Rowley’s words, “consistently, almost deliberately thwarting the Minneapolis F.B.I. agents’ efforts.”

To this day, Mueller — Eric Holder’s gift to Justice, held over by an entranced Ashcroft and determined to protect his benefactor from embarrassment — insists that even an unencumbered investigation would not have stopped 9/11.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/27/opinion/27SAFI.html

[Duckster]

Well december, the blame game has started. So?

Throwing blame around is one thing. Being responsible is quite another. Unless it goes to court, don’t assume anyone will be held accountable.

[elucidator]

The Blame Game!

Mueller, Mueller, Bob Mueller, Banana Pana Bob Mueller, …

[december]

*Originally posted by Duckster *
**Well december, the blame game has started. So?
**

So. maybe Mueller should be replaced as FBI director. Maybe certain FBI Washington bigwigs should be replaced. Certainly someone needs to find a way to fix the problems and make the FBI more effective.

BTW I have no objection to an independent investigation, and I think it’s appropriate that the relevant House and Senate committess are holding hearings. Nevertheless, I hold Ashcroft and Bush responsible for making the FBI work properly, because that’s the line of command.