KDAQ Repairs:

2:14am

Tue November 13, 2012
National Security

The FBI's Role In The Petraeus Investigation

Originally published on Tue November 13, 2012 11:40 am

In Washington scandals, the question is usually what the White House knew.

But in the case of former CIA Director David Petraeus, lawmakers are asking why President Obama did not know about a federal investigation that had found evidence Petraeus was having an affair.

"Once the FBI realized that it was investigating the director of the CIA or the CIA director had come within its focus or its scope, I believe at that time they had an absolute obligation to tell the president ... not to protect David Petraeus, but to protect the president," Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told MSNBC on Monday.

Matthew Miller, who worked as a top aide to Attorney General Eric Holder at the Justice Department, says he couldn't disagree more.

"If the Justice Department is investigating a member of the administration, they don't want to notify other people in the administration," Miller said. "In fact, if they had notified the White House while this investigation was ongoing, you'd hear howls from members of Congress that this investigation might have been politicized."

There's another reason for not sharing leads more widely, Miller said. Sometimes when the FBI investigates, the allegations don't pan out, or they don't merit any criminal charges. Two law enforcement sources tell NPR that appears to be the case here.

The White House says Obama was first briefed on the case last Thursday, even though federal investigators started looking into what would become the Petraeus case about six months ago.

The FBI inquiry started with a woman in Florida, who socializes with the Petraeus family. She told a friend in the Tampa FBI office that she had received some bothersome, anonymous email messages. Investigators on the trail of possible cyber-harassment traced the messages to Paula Broadwell, author of a biography of Petraeus. And in an email account, the FBI found communications that depicted an affair between Petraeus and Broadwell.

Senior Justice Department officials, including the attorney general, were alerted in the late summer, before FBI agents interviewed key players including Broadwell and Petraeus in September and October. The last interview was within days of the election.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told Fox News he still has a lot of questions, particularly about why the House and Senate Intelligence Committees were kept in the dark.

"It's mysterious," Hayden said. "I really don't have insight into it. It appears that the bureau was balancing the law enforcement process [and] the privacy of some individuals involved. Hanging out there is that requirement in law to keep the intelligence committees fully and currently informed about significant intelligence activities."

That requirement is found in the National Security Act and in Executive Order 12333, covering intelligence activities, that dates back to the Reagan era.

The two law enforcement officials told NPR they didn't tell Congress because the matter did not rise to that level, since they concluded no "intelligence activities" were implicated.

"That's the law. That's what guides us," one of the officials said.

Petraeus was a witness, not a target, in an ongoing criminal investigation, and they uncovered no cybersecurity breaches. Until very recently, agents were still trying to figure out whether anyone broke any other laws.

"They looked very carefully, balancing privacy and fairness with facts," the official added. "There was great concern over not jumping the gun on anything."

Under Justice Department guidelines, reaffirmed in December 2007, after a scandal over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys in the George W. Bush administration, federal authorities are barred from sharing information even with most people in the White House, unless there's a national security exception.

Bobby Chesney, who teaches law at the University of Texas, says there's an obvious national security issue when the CIA director appears on law enforcement radar, "but whether there was ever a formal statutory obligation to give that reporting from the FBI to the intelligence committees, for example, that's far from clear."

Former CIA Director Hayden said it is clear law enforcement was in a tough spot.

"This is an unprecedented sort of thing," Hayden said. "There's no rule book or history as to how you handle these kinds of events."

On Wednesday, officials from the CIA and the FBI will hold private meetings with lawmakers on Capitol Hill, and maybe start the process of rewriting that rule book, should they ever need it again.

Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.

Transcript

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

Some members of Congress want to know why they didn't know about all this sooner. It is clear that the FBI, and prosecutors at the Justice Department, were investigating General Petraeus - and others - well before the election. Most lawmakers did not know about it until afterward; and nor, apparently, did the president of the United States. NPR's Carrie Johnson reports.

CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: In Washington scandals, the question is usually what the White House knew. But in the case of former Central Intelligence Director David Petraeus, lawmakers are asking why President Obama did not know about a federal investigation that had found evidence Petraeus was having an affair. Peter King is a Republican U.S. House member, from New York. Here he is, on MSNBC.

(SOUNDBITE OF MSNBC BROADCAST)

REP. PETER KING: Once the FBI realized that it was investigating the director of the CIA - or the CIA director had come within its focus, or its scope - I believe at that time, they had an absolute obligation to tell the president; not to protect David Petraeus, but to protect the president.

JOHNSON: Matthew Miller worked as a top aide to Attorney General Eric Holder at the Justice Department. He couldn't disagree more.

MATTHEW MILLER: If the Justice Department is investigating a member of the administration, they don't want to notify other people in the administration. In fact, if they had notified the White House while this investigation was ongoing, you'd hear howls from members of Congress that the investigation might have been politicized.

JOHNSON: There's another reason for not sharing leads more widely, Miller says. Sometimes, the FBI investigates, and the allegations don't pan out - or they don't merit any criminal charges. Law-enforcement sources tell NPR, that appears to be the case here. The White House says Mr. Obama was first briefed on the case last Thursday, even though federal investigators started looking into what would become the Petraeus case, about six months ago.

The FBI probe started with a woman in Florida ,who socializes with the Petraeus family. She told a friend in the bureau, she had received some bothersome email messages. Investigators traced the messages to Paula Broadwell, author of a biography of Petraeus. And in an email account, the FBI found communications that depicted an affair between the two.

Senior Justice Department officials were alerted in the late summer - before FBI agents interviewed key players, in September and October. The last interview was within days of the election. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told Fox News, he still has lots of questions.

(SOUNDBITE OF FOX NEWS BROADCAST)

MICHAEL HAYDEN: It's mysterious. I really don't have insight into it. It appears that the bureau was balancing the law-enforcement process, the privacy of some individuals involved. But hanging out there is that requirement, in law, to keep the intelligence committees fully and currently informed about significant intelligence activities.

JOHNSON: That requirement is found in the National Security Act, and in an executive order on U.S. intelligence activities that dates back to the Ronald Reagan era. Law-enforcement officials say they didn't tell Congress because Petraeus was a witness - not a target - in an ongoing criminal investigation. And until very recently, agents were still trying to figure out whether anyone broke any laws. Under Justice Department guidelines, authorities are barred from sharing information even with most people in the White House, unless there's a national security exception. Bobby Chesney teaches law at the University of Texas. Chesney says there's an obvious national security issue, when the CIA director appears on law-enforcement radar.

BOBBY CHESNEY: But whether there was ever a formal, statutory obligation to give that reporting from the FBI to the intelligence committees, for example - that's far from clear.

JOHNSON: Former CIA Director Hayden says it is clear, law enforcement was in a tough spot.

(SOUNDBITE OF FOX NEWS BROADCAST)

HAYDEN: This is an unprecedented sort of thing. There's no rule book, or history, as to how you handle these kinds of events.

JOHNSON: Tomorrow, officials from the CIA, and the FBI, will hold private meetings with lawmakers on Capitol Hill and maybe start the process of rewriting that rule book, should they ever need it again.

Carrie Johnson, NPR News, Washington.