Report: FBI agent who investigated Broadwell sent shirtless photos to other woman in case; Update: FBI searching Broadwell’s home? Update: More clues

posted at 9:28 pm on November 12, 2012 by Allahpundit

We’re governed by circus clowns.

Shirtless circus clowns:

The FBI agent who started the case was a friend of Jill Kelley, the Tampa woman who received harassing, anonymous emails that led to the probe, according to officials. Ms. Kelley, a volunteer who organizes social events for military personnel in the Tampa area, complained in May about the emails to a friend who is an FBI agent. That agent referred it to a cyber crimes unit, which opened an investigation.

However, supervisors soon became concerned that the initial agent might have grown obsessed with the matter, and prohibited him from any role in the investigation, according to the officials.

The FBI officials found that he had sent shirtless pictures of himself to Ms. Kelley, according to the people familiar with the probe.

That same agent, after being barred from the case, contacted a member of Congress, Washington Republican David Reichert, because he was concerned senior FBI officials were going to sweep the matter under the rug, the officials said.

Josh Marshall observes that Petraeus suddenly looks like the most mentally balanced person involved in this. This does seem to answer some of the lingering questions, though. Who was the “whistleblower” who tipped Reichert and, eventually, Cantor? Now we know. Why were the DOJ and FBI allegedly reluctant to share the news about Petraeus with the White House and DNI until very recently? Maybe because this scandal is almost as much of an embarrassment to them as it is to Petraeus. Why did the FBI take an unusual interest in what appeared to be an otherwise routine case of cyber-harassment? Because, if you believe the Journal, the agent involved had an unusual interest in Kelley. In fact, the Daily Beast claims to have spoken to a source who’s seen the e-mails Broadwell sent to Kelley. I was expecting there’d be death threats — “hair-raising” material, as I said in a Greenroom post this weekend. It ain’t that:

The messages were instead what the source terms “kind of cat-fight stuff.”

“More like, ‘Who do you think you are? … You parade around the base … You need to take it down a notch,’” according to the source, who was until recently at the highest levels of the intelligence community and prefers not to be identified by name…

When the FBI friend showed the emails to the cyber squad in the Tampa field office, her fellow agents noted that the absence of any overt threats.

“No, ‘I’ll kill you’ or ‘I’ll burn your house down,’” the source says. “It doesn’t seem really that bad.”

The squad was not even sure the case was worth pursuing, the source says.

“What does this mean? There’s no threat there. This is against the law?” the agents asked themselves by the source’s account.

Now we know why no criminal charges were filed. As for why Kelley has reportedly lawyered up with a verrrry pricey legal team, that’s still not entirely obvious. But the weirder this gets, the more understandable it is that she’d want top-notch lawyers on her side. All this story needs now is some sort of John Edwards angle and we’ll have achieved maximum scandal-ocity.

Exit question: Who left the mysterious Wikipedia edit on Paula Broadwell’s entry back in January?

Update: The plot thickens:

Gallagher is a reporter with WCNC in North Carolina and her Twitter timeline is filling up with reports from the scene outside Broadwell’s home. Maybe I spoke too soon about there being no charges filed in this case. But … charges for what?

Update: I assume the probable cause here has to do with those classified documents found on Broadwell’s computer. But that was weeks ago, if I have the timeline straight. Why are they only searching now?

Update: I’m still thinking about Newsweek’s source on Broadwell’s e-mails in the piece quoted above. He was “until recently at the highest levels of the intelligence community and prefers not to be identified by name” and he knows what was in the messages Broadwell sent to Kelley? Is there any obvious suspect besides Petraeus himself?

Update: Yep, sounds like the FBI’s suddenly very curious as to where Broadwell got her info:

“Menacing” anonymous emails that launched the FBI investigation which ultimately brought down CIA Director David Petraeus contained references to the “comings and goings” of high-level U.S. military officials, raising concerns that someone had improperly gained access to sensitive and classified information, a source close to the recipient tells NBC News…

What most alarmed Kelley and the FBI, the source said, were references to “the comings and goings” of high-level generals from the U.S. Central Command, which is based at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, and the U.S. Southern Command, as well as Petraeus — including events that were not on any public schedule.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

Gawd, what a screw up. Can’t Obama do anything right?
If they wanted to shut Petraeus up just arrange for him to go to the park to met Hillary.
* * *
Flippin’ amateurs.

mechkiller_k on November 12, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Melodrama aside, once Obama accepted Petraeus’s resignation he lost control of Petraeus’s testimony through assertion of some variation of executive privilege. And with a grant of immunity, a Congressional inquiry should manage to circumvent a Fifth Amendment shield.

Barnestormer on November 13, 2012 at 9:59 AM

a wholesale attempt at denigrating the military
Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 9:51 AM

It’s sure beginning to look that way, isn’t it.

It would fit, too, for an administration who hates the military. After they denigrate the leadership, they could demoralize the troops by appointing someone like John Kerry to be Defense Secretary. And then they could engineer devastating cuts in the defense budget (and blame them on the GOP).

petefrt on November 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Bradky on November 13, 2012 at 9:53 AM

You’re probably correct but they keep bringing more people who are involved in the military (even on a social level) into this story. I’m not a big fan of soap operas. If it is all just Peyton Place, why are we getting constant updates? And four dead in Benghazi, gets lost in the stupidity of it all.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM

petefrt on November 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM

I just don’t know, but it seems to me that we have strayed far from the original point of focus.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:07 AM

And four dead in Benghazi, gets lost in the stupidity of it all.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Convenient, isn’t it, that the sex scandal is also being used to deflect from Benghazi.

petefrt on November 13, 2012 at 10:09 AM

All of this fallderall calls for the nomination and consecretion of Ketchup Boy Kerry (1/2 of my namesake) as the purple heart winner, (when he wounded himself in his own ass by a grain of exploding rice deep inside Cambodia at Christmas),will likely get to the bottom and clean up this cluster as he has been well known to do in the past. Dump Hitler, she’s ways tired, and consecrate Giggalo Ketchup Boy so he can rectify this matter quickly!

ConcealedKerry on November 13, 2012 at 10:10 AM

petefrt on November 13, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Yes, that truly horrible movie “Idiocracy” is starting to look like a documentary.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Big boobs make men act very foolishly.

Ted Torgerson on November 12, 2012 at 9:35 PM

I hope you’re not being bigoted; because, you know, we’re just born that way.

Nutstuyu on November 13, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:07 AM

As I said in another thread, Watergate was just about a burglary – until it wasn’t.

I’m going to do something I usually have a hard time doing, display a little patience until after all the Congressional hearings about Benghazi are completed.

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 10:23 AM

And four dead in Benghazi, gets lost in the stupidity of it all.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM

True but all the more reason to be furious with Petraeus and possibly Allen. Their actions (illegal if in uniform) provided the duck and cover an admin intent on burying the tragedy might have needed.

Bradky on November 13, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 10:23 AM

I don’t think we have any choice but to be patient. When all is said and done, this is typical Washington. The best that I can hope for is that it becomes so convoluted that the press is unable to filter what they think will help or hurt Obama. They are the part of the equation that has an agenda.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Bradky on November 13, 2012 at 10:25 AM

I have never had any particular affection for these men, other than assuming they were competent. I thought the Democrats running that Betray Us ads was in very poor taste but I have no dog in this fight other than the larger picture of the original subject of the investigation. These men’s shortcomings should not be where the focus is in the media. Kind of interesting how they ran from it with Edwards and they are embracing it with such gusto now.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Kind of interesting how they ran from it with Edwards and they are embracing it with such gusto now.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 10:43 AM

We all know it’s only relevant when someone other than a Democrat does it and when they do it, it is a private matter.

roy_batty on November 13, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Let’s see….White House logs show Muslim Brotherhood leaders as
frequent guests…..Obama hell bent on replacing leadership in the Middle East with Muslim Brotherhood.

How many US generals have either resigned, been reassigned or are
involved in sex scandals?

Could it be that Obama is hell bent on replacing generals with
those more loyal to his agenda? Who are they? And what is Obama’s agenda? Does Obama want to be ruler of the world?

Amjean on November 13, 2012 at 11:02 AM

roy_batty on November 13, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Yeah, I think Gawker lays it all out quite nicely for everyone.

That’s the day Republican golden boy and former CIA director David Petraeus resigned as the nation’s top spy amid allegations he was cheating on his wife with Broadwell, his biographer.

In the future when we want to know the dirt on someone we should first start a rumor that they are considering a Republican party affiliation.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Holder’s cleaner team is on the scene.

Mr. Arrogant on November 13, 2012 at 7:30 AM

Possibly closer to the truth than we’ll ever know.

slickwillie2001 on November 13, 2012 at 11:06 AM

We can all see how much control the White House has…the ineptness is almost beyond belief, it’s like a bad writer, writing a novel and just making up stuff to fill pages.

A dead ambassador, dead military, blaming on a video that had less than 300 hits on YouTube, Generals diddling writers, FBI agents sending shirtless photos obsessed with women he is investigating, meanwhile, back at Benghazi, prisoners being secretly held in captivity, we will probably find out they were “interviewed” with enhanced procedures, a Secretary of the State who decides to fly out to Australia to drink wine and party with friends, a president completely unaware of anything going on in his administration…

Folks, a writer could not dream up such a cheesy novel…

right2bright on November 13, 2012 at 11:09 AM

This is what it shows…the obvious…people care more about the sex lives of a General, than the life of an Ambassador…

It’s like when they show a dog or cat in distress, the public get’s all emotional and involved, but a death of a child? No big deal…

A whale caught in a harbor elicits more news than 10 kids killed by gang violence…

We are a screwed up nation in priorities…

right2bright on November 13, 2012 at 11:12 AM

So these two cat fightin’ ladies sent each other, on average, between TWENTY AND THIRTY emails PER DAY for about 2 3/4 years.

What a couple of f*king losers.

Dave Rywall on November 13, 2012 at 9:42 AM

You need more coffee or a new brain. You confused the parties.

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:33 AM

As I said in another thread, Watergate was just about a burglary – until it wasn’t.

I’m going to do something I usually have a hard time doing, display a little patience until after all the Congressional hearings about Benghazi are completed.

Flora Duh on November 13, 2012 at 10:23 AM

No one died in Watergate. Benghazi will be a big part of this story. You have it right.

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:37 AM

In the future when we want to know the dirt on someone we should first start a rumor that they are considering a Republican party affiliation.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Petraeus is NOT a R.

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:38 AM

You need more coffee or a new brain. You confused the parties.

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Just watch, everyone involved in this will suddenly become Republicans. Presto!

When you own the liberal media wonderful things are possible.

slickwillie2001 on November 13, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Schadenfreude on November 13, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I don’t know what he is but if you read Gawker, they certainly seem to think so which makes them double down on their moral superiority. Like I said, apparently a rumor will do it.

Cindy Munford on November 13, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Folowup to my post 11/12 @ 10:06PM:
“Posted November 13, 2012, 10:04 am MT
Denver’s Channel 7 “mortified” over Petraeus story goof
By Joanne Ostrow, Denver Post
Monday during the 5 p.m. newscast, Denver ABC affiliate KMGH-Channel 7 committed what news director Jeff Harris called “an embarrassing mistake” and one that’s too risque to repeat in a family newspaper.

The station showed a digitally redesigned graphic of the cover of the Petraeus biography, “All In.” The title was, um, rewritten.

An editor grabbed the wrong image online, Harris said. The fake image was not created locally. The reaction from viewers was minimal (“my wife called me”), but took off in the blogosphere. Harris declined to discuss whether disciplinary actions had been or might be taken, except to say, “when we make mistakes we take them seriously.”

n0doz on November 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM

So, Petraeus investigated Benghazi. I’m shocked that with this scandal hanging over his head that he gave cover to Obama. Just shocked!

besser tot als rot on November 13, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Looks to me like Obama’s real goal here is to demoralize the millitary….the millitary is the one government controlled entity that the American people honor, trust and support. Here we have officers behaving badly, Obama removing officers like General Ham…pretty much anyone who has any idea what really happened in Benghazi. Dirty…dirty..dirty. Thanks so much to all the people who voted to re-elect Obama….this is going to get much uglier. Now that everyone is paying attention to this….wonder what Obama is really doing when no one is looking.

azconservativegirl on November 13, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Paula Broadwell, a mother of two, is a graduate of West Point, University of Denver and Harvard, and is a doctoral candidate at King’s College London, a Lt. Col in the Army Reserve, and former Tufts University professor. Hey, this whole thing could just be a cry for help. Type-A Personality Disorder.

http://morninmojo.wordpress.com/

Mornin Mojo on November 13, 2012 at 3:32 PM

I still can’t help wondering whether there is any connection to the CIA operative who survived the Benghazi attack who said he was told to “stand down” and not defend the consulate.

If Gen. Petraeus didn’t give the “stand down” order, but one of his subordinates did, Petraeus as CIA director would have a legitimate right to investigate who DID give that order, and heads might have rolled. Is it possible that whoever gave the order to “stand down” might have tried to cover his @$$ by leaking the Petraeus/Broadwell story to Jill Kelley, in order to bring down Petraeus before Petraeus had the chance to fire Mr. Stand Down?

Steve Z on November 13, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Come on guys! He just wanted to show her his new ‘Female Body Inspector’ tattoo..

Opinionnation on November 13, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5