Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lawmakers Say Misstatements Cloud F.B.I. Chief's Credibility
New York Times ^ | 5/31/02 | PHILIP SHENON

Posted on 05/30/2002 10:23:36 PM PDT by kattracks


WASHINGTON, May 30 — With admissions this week that the F.B.I. might have been able to foil the Sept. 11 attacks and that it had bungled additional clues, Robert S. Mueller III has contradicted much of his past public defense of the bureau, raising new concern today on Capitol Hill about his leadership of the embattled agency.

Lawmakers said in interviews that the F.B.I. director was secure in his job for now and that they welcomed the plans he announced on Wednesday to change and enlarge the bureau's counterterrorism program.

But they said a review of his public remarks about the Sept. 11 investigation had raised uncomfortable questions about the F.B.I. director's credibility and about his ability to gather accurate information from his deputies.

Mr. Mueller's credibility was harshly attacked in a letter made public last weekend in which a Minneapolis agent said the F.B.I. director was engaged in a public relations campaign "to protect the F.B.I. at all costs" after Sept. 11.

In a news conference on Wednesday that amounted to a painful mea culpa for the bureau and for his performance in the nine months since he took over the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mr. Mueller said, "I have made mistakes occasionally in my public comments based on information or a lack of information that I subsequently got."

He was referring specifically to a widely publicized Sept. 14 statement in which he offered assurances — later proved to be false — that the bureau had no warning that terrorists might be training in American flight schools. On Sept. 17, Mr. Mueller went further, saying he knew of "no warning signs" of any sort of attack.

Senator Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican who is on the Judiciary Committee, said his staff investigators would explore the accusations made by the Minneapolis agent, Coleen Rowley, that Mr. Mueller and other senior F.B.I. officials had intentionally shaded the truth about the investigation last summer of Zacarias Moussaoui.

Mr. Moussaoui, who has been charged with conspiring in the Sept. 11 attacks, was arrested in Minnesota in August. Ms. Rowley said F.B.I. headquarters had obstructed the work of the local office in determining if Mr. Moussaoui was a terrorist.

"I believe that his heart is in the right spot," Senator Grassley said of Mr. Mueller, a decorated Vietnam War veteran and career federal prosecutor who until this week had received almost universal praise on Capitol Hill for his early performance at the F.B.I.

"But I'm going to give a great deal of deference to a whistle-blower," Mr. Grassley said of Ms. Rowley. "It gives me responsibility for digging deeper."

Mr. Grassley said that senior aides to Mr. Mueller may be to blame for the misstatements that had come back to haunt the F.B.I. director and that Mr. Mueller's deputies should be held accountable if they were responsible. "I'm willing to forgive him," the senator said. "But I'm not willing to forgive the agents who gave him the information."

Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat who is a member of the Judiciary and Intelligence committees, said she was perplexed by some of the inaccuracies that have been uncovered in Mr. Mueller's public statements, and that she was concerned that they might reflect an unwise decision to "take on the burden of defending what has been done in the past."

But she said that inadvertent mistakes by Mr. Mueller in his public comments might be understandable, especially in his first few, chaotic weeks on the job. "I have no concerns that he is up to the task," she said. "I think he has to be given a fair chance to prove himself."

A review of Mr. Mueller's public remarks since Sept. 11 shows that the director, who arrived at the F.B.I. only a week before the attacks, was quick to defend the bureau's performance and to suggest that there was little the F.B.I. could have done to prevent the attacks.

Some of his early remarks have proved to be untrue, and he has made what appear to inconsistent statements on other elements of the inquiry, notably the Moussaoui case.

"The tragedies quite clearly astonish and shock me and the country," he said at a news conference on Sept. 14. "The fact that there were a number of individuals that happened to have received training at flight schools here is news, quite obviously. If we had understood that to be the case, we would have — perhaps one could have averted this."

Three days later, in the wake of news reports about Mr. Moussaoui's arrest, Mr. Mueller was asked again if the bureau had missed "any warning signs." He offered a more wide-ranging defense, saying, "There were no warning signs that I'm aware of that would indicate this type of operation in the country."

In her May 21 letter to the F.B.I. director, Ms. Rowley said she and other Minneapolis agents had been alarmed by Mr. Mueller's public comments and "immediately sought to reach your office through an assortment of higher-level F.B.I.-HQ contacts, in order to quickly make you aware of the background of the Moussaoui investigation and forewarn you so that your public statements could be accordingly modified."

But she said that when Mr. Mueller and his deputies repeated the comments in the weeks that followed, the Minneapolis agents "faced the sad realization that the remarks indicated someone, possibly with your approval, had decided to circle the wagons at F.B.I. HQ in an apparent effort to protect the F.B.I. from embarrassment."

Questioned this week about Ms. Rowley's accusations, Mr. Mueller conceded that his Sept. 14 statement had been in error and that he had been unaware that day of a memorandum sent to F.B.I. headquarters in July by a Phoenix agent who had called for a nationwide investigation of flight schools in light of evidence suggesting that Arab men with ties to terrorist groups might be seeking training.

"The fact of the matter is when I made that statement, I wasn't aware of the Arizona E.C.," Mr. Mueller said Wednesday, using the initials for electronic communication. "After I made that statement at the press conference, somebody brought it to my attention that, look there's this Phoenix E.C. out there."

The review of his public comments shows that Mr. Mueller has also given other seemingly contradictory statements about the Moussaoui case — specifically, about why the bureau did not pursue a warrant before Sept. 11 that might have allowed Minneapolis agents to search his computer, where evidence linking him to the hijackers was found.

In October and again in December, when he announced Mr. Moussaoui's indictment, Mr. Mueller said publicly that there had been insufficient evidence before Sept. 11 to request the court order sought by the Minneapolis agents.

"When it was looked at, there was insufficient probable cause — clear, insufficient probable cause," Mr. Mueller explained in October. In December, he said again that "attorneys back at F.B.I. determined that there was insufficient probable cause," which "appears to be an accurate decision."

But on Wednesday, Mr. Mueller backed away from his earlier statements, saying that he had not made a decision on whether the search warrant should have been sought. "I haven't parsed it," he said. "I know the Hill is looking at that."



TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: espionagelist; moussaoui; robertmueller; terrorwar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: BlackbirdSST
Here is one that I really like...
NSPD-5: Review of U.S. Intelligence May 9, 2001 [Text Not Available]
On May 9, 2001 President Bush issued National Security Presidential Directive 5 which calls for a comprehensive review of U.S. intelligence.
The review is intended to "ensure that U.S. intelligence capabilities are honed to serve us on a wide range of critical challenges that face us now and in the future."
The review is to be conducted by two panels named by DCI George Tenet. One panel will be comprised of selected governmental officials. The second panel, to be named by Tenet in conjunction with National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, will be composed of nongovernmental experts.
The review has "a broad mandate to challenge the status quo and explore new and innovative techniques, systems, practices and processes" for foreign intelligence, according to a White House press statement.
The panels were to report to the President in summer 2001.

21 posted on 05/31/2002 3:26:03 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST
Loeb, Vernon. "U.S. Intelligence Efforts to Get Major Review." Washington Post, 12 May 2001, A3.

On 9 May 2001, President George W. Bush signed National Security Presidential Directive 5, ordering "a comprehensive review of the nation's intelligence capabilities." DCI George J. Tenet is directed "to determine how the CIA and a dozen sister agencies are coping with rapid technological change and difficult new targets.... Tenet must name an internal panel of intelligence officials and an external panel from the private sector to conduct the review and make recommendations. The directive calls for Tenet to consult with national security adviser Condoleezza Rice in naming the external team."

Loeb, Vernon. "CIA Panel May Lack Voice for Change." Washington Post, 7 Aug. 2001, A13.

The eight-member panel of experts selected by DCI George J. Tenet to conduct a "comprehensive review" of U.S. intelligence is headed by retired Gen. Brent Scowcroft and includes retired Adm. David Jeremiah; former CIA deputy director Richard Kerr; former undersecretary of state Stapleton Roy; former deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick; John Foster, a member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board from 1973 to 1990; Jeong Kim, an information technology expert who serves on the board of In-Q-Tel; and William Schneider, a businessman who heads the Defense Science Board.

Some questions exist as to whether the panel includes "voices for radical change." According to Robert D. Steele, who heads Open Source Solutions: "There isn't a single iconoclast in the group." However, Jack Devine, a former top CIA operations official, disagrees, noting that "the Scowcroft panel is more than a rubber stamp for the status quo, particularly with people such as Kerr and Jeremiah on board."

22 posted on 05/31/2002 3:30:09 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
And just to cover FR's behind...GENERAL POST-WORLD WAR II ...that is where I got the previous excerpts from.
23 posted on 05/31/2002 3:32:20 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
G*D, this is all so depressing. Why do I feel like the inmates are in charge????
24 posted on 05/31/2002 3:44:15 AM PDT by Elkiejg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Elkiejg
Why do I feel like the inmates are in charge????
A rhetorical question, but I'll try...Because of your innate sense of unease, much like the fight or flight response each of us possesses.
Just a guess.
25 posted on 05/31/2002 3:57:50 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Good post bump.
26 posted on 05/31/2002 4:03:36 AM PDT by RJCogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
Thanks for the INFORMATION.
27 posted on 05/31/2002 4:09:30 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
I like to share. Many times it is to my own detriment.
28 posted on 05/31/2002 4:25:46 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Now go find something important to research.
I already have.
29 posted on 05/31/2002 4:27:15 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
The TRUTH needs no clarification or defense. It stands on its own.
30 posted on 05/31/2002 4:44:50 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PGalt; Miss Marple; BlackbirdSST
A little more...EPIC Analysis of New Justice Department Guidelines on Searching and Seizing Computers
31 posted on 05/31/2002 4:47:59 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: OKCSubmariner; Lion's Cub; Uncle Bill; Wallaby; Fred Mertz; rdavis84; Betty Jo; AtticusX
You folks may or may not find some of this stuff important.
Just wanted to let ya'll know it was here. I don't know who else to flag who might be interested.
32 posted on 05/31/2002 5:57:46 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
We're a diminishing number, alright.

I posted this comment on another thread, going to keep it up, too :-) ---

It's amazing to me that FR "readers" appear to be so narrowly focused on protecting their guys that they Can't consider the coming abuses at an order of magnitude of probably 10 by the next Clinton administration.

I really have lost any possible future sympathy for them and the rest of the sheep who're riding their bandwagon.

33 posted on 05/31/2002 6:14:07 AM PDT by rdavis84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rdavis84; thinden
Too few see what's happening. Ain't it a shame?
34 posted on 05/31/2002 6:18:37 AM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Ethel and I are going out to buy new gowns!
35 posted on 05/31/2002 7:34:47 AM PDT by Betty Jo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: philman_36;rdavis84;ALL
Aint it downright @#$&^%$@*&% amazing how they talk out of both sides of their mouths?

"The computers are so bad, churchs dont even want them as donations"

Yet we see the above nfo re:their top-notch equipment!

Excuse my #%&@*,but what is PROMISE?

What about Carnovore?

I hate to go "ART BELLISH" but could our stooges be coming clinicly unglued?

Remember the "beams" pointed at our embassy in Russia way back?

What improvements have been made since then?

Maybe they are all acting goofy because they are being made GOOFY!

36 posted on 05/31/2002 7:52:10 AM PDT by Betty Jo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Betty Jo
Some thought that I was just kidding, but I meant it when I said that this recycled administration of daddy bush's is SENILE!

Note I'm leaving the "Leader of the Pack" out of this one. I don't want to get started :-)

37 posted on 05/31/2002 8:06:27 AM PDT by rdavis84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Betty Jo
Aint it downright @#$&^%$@*&% amazing how they talk out of both sides of their mouths?
I believe that is SOP and par for the course.
Tell a lie long enough...
38 posted on 05/31/2002 8:16:19 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
Get off Mueller's back. He was only sworn in on 9/4/01, ONE WEEK BEFORE 9/11. He is a good honorable man and I think he has been screwed by some Clintonites still in the bureau. For God's sake, he is a decorated Marine veteran & he will straigthen their butts out. He has already gotten rid of the top thugs who were there & replaced them. (Great Move). There is certainly something wrong with the FBI when the director AND the President had infor withheld from them even AFTER 9/11. I'm just saying, give the man a break.
39 posted on 05/31/2002 12:03:53 PM PDT by nightowl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nightowl
I'll give him a "PRETZEL!"
40 posted on 05/31/2002 12:18:16 PM PDT by Betty Jo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson