NYT: FBI agent involved in Petraeus case pursued it because of his “worldview”
posted at 10:34 am on November 13, 2012 by Allahpundit
Ms. Kelley, a volunteer with wounded veterans and military families, brought her complaint to a rank-and-file agent she knew from a previous encounter with the F.B.I. office, the official also said. That agent, who had previously pursued a friendship with Ms. Kelley and had earlier sent her shirtless photographs of himself, was “just a conduit” for the complaint, he said. He had no training in cybercrime, was not part of the cyber squad handling the case and was never assigned to the investigation.
But the agent, who was not identified, continued to “nose around” about the case, and eventually his superiors “told him to stay the hell away from it, and he was not invited to briefings,” the official said. The Wall Street Journal first reported on Monday night that the agent had been barred from the case.
Later, the agent became convinced — incorrectly, the official said — that the case had stalled. Because of his “worldview,” as the official put it, he suspected a politically motivated cover-up to protect President Obama.
The impression I got from last night’s Journal piece was that the FBI agent had become obsessed with Kelley and ended up sending her shirtless photos of himself after the investigation had begun. In other words, he was letting his supposed attraction to her interfere with his professional duties in handling the case. This NYT piece makes it sound like something different: The shirtless pics happened before any of this came out, then later Kelley sought him out for help once she started getting e-mails from Broadwell. It was his anti-Obama politics, if the sources here are to be believed, that led him to pursue the case, not any alleged infatuation with Kelley. He was obsessed, it seems, with the possibility of a cover up, not so much with her.
Which is not to say the two are mutually exclusive. Maybe he had a thing for her and wanted to impress her by pursuing the investigation and suspected a cover-up to protect O. But Mollie Hemingway asks a good question: Why are we getting two different versions of what this guy’s core motive was? Is someone retaliating against him by trying to ruin his reputation?
Recently in the Green Room: