Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DURHAM D

(33,055 posts)
15. "They" didn't.
Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:45 PM
Nov 2012

One FBI agent who was on a mission went to a Congressman who then went to Cantor. The renegade agent didn't know that the investigation was conducted (completed) and there was no national security issue. The agent was apparently full of himself and I understand he has now been removed or disciplined or fired or something.

If that one agent had not gone to a member of congress, thus widening the number of people who knew about Director Petraeus and Paula, I don't believe the WH would have ever been told about the matter and Petraeus would not have been forced to resign.

I believe that single agent actually did us a favor but that was not his intent.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Why did the FBI go to Cantor? [View all] cliffordu Nov 2012 OP
From what I understand an FBI agent went to him to report it. southernyankeebelle Nov 2012 #1
Right. But WHY??? cliffordu Nov 2012 #5
Today's NYT reports the agent believed nothing was being done... DonViejo Nov 2012 #32
Kool. Thanks!! cliffordu Nov 2012 #33
Source is described as a whistleblower. emulatorloo Nov 2012 #34
It is a wonder why. southernyankeebelle Nov 2012 #35
No, not to "report" it... to LEAK it. beac Nov 2012 #9
Gee this is one big cluster F. southernyankeebelle Nov 2012 #36
b/c he's involved elehhhhna Nov 2012 #2
I am licking my lips in anticipation Whisp Nov 2012 #26
It wasn't the other way around? rocktivity Nov 2012 #3
No - the woman who got the emails went to the local office of the FBI. cliffordu Nov 2012 #7
I think she went to a friend/acquaintance that worked for the FBI Whisp Nov 2012 #27
He was hoping to use it against the White House Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #8
As I understand it.... KauaiK Nov 2012 #4
Yep. cliffordu Nov 2012 #6
I think that is correct. leveymg Nov 2012 #10
And he's no "whistleblower"... he's a LEAKER. n/t beac Nov 2012 #11
Why wouldn't Cantor have mentioned this before the election to hurt Obama? aint_no_life_nowhere Nov 2012 #13
Yep--if it had the potential to hurt Obama, they would have TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #25
Yeah..why Cantor? PearliePoo2 Nov 2012 #12
FBI didn't officially go to Cantor. HooptieWagon Nov 2012 #14
"They" didn't. DURHAM D Nov 2012 #15
There's more to this story than we're being told at this point in time.... OldDem2012 Nov 2012 #16
I suppose it was to inform him that the FBI was getting too close to the repug establishment. aandegoons Nov 2012 #17
A rogue FBI employee went to Dave Reichert (R - Washington) ...Dave Reichert went to Cantor alcibiades_mystery Nov 2012 #18
I hope Reichert did something wrong marlakay Nov 2012 #23
THANKS!! cliffordu Nov 2012 #30
This is how I understand the timeline of events justiceischeap Nov 2012 #19
2.65 million federal employees The Straight Story Nov 2012 #20
ny times says it was a frustrated agent who went to Cantor, unaware that the investigation was amborin Nov 2012 #21
The only reason for "frustration" would be political damage TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #28
i agree amborin Nov 2012 #40
I think it is more harmful to the GOP than Obama Hamlette Nov 2012 #22
The FBI didn't go to him. Some FBI MineralMan Nov 2012 #24
Jane Mayer would like to know as well Z_I_Peevey Nov 2012 #29
Great link! That asks all the questions I would cliffordu Nov 2012 #31
Why don't you read a few threads on DU and then delete this one. Coyotl Nov 2012 #37
Well, cause, golly gosh, cliffordu Nov 2012 #39
The GOP is just looking for their advantage in this Joey Liberal Nov 2012 #38
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why did the FBI go to Can...»Reply #15