Providing Media Coverage to Tea Party Issues.

FBI director defends bureau over test cheating

Written By: Guest Contributor
Published: 7/29/2010 Print This Article
Share |

 
FBI director defends bureau over test cheating

By MATT APUZZO and ADAM GOLDMAN - reprinted from Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON – FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress on Wednesday that he does not know how many of his agents cheated on an important exam on the bureau's policies, an embarrassing revelation that raises questions about whether the FBI knows its own rules for conducting surveillance on Americans.

The Justice Department inspector general is investigating whether hundreds of agents cheated on the test. Some took the open-book test together, violating rules that they take it alone. Others finished the lengthy exam unusually quickly, current and former officials said.

The test was supposed to ensure that FBI agents understand new rules allowing them to conduct surveillance and open files on Americans without evidence of criminal wrongdoing. If agents can't pass that test without cheating, civil liberties groups ask, how can they follow them?

Asked about an Associated Press report about the cheating investigation, Mueller said he does not know how widespread the problem was.

"I've got a general idea, but I do not know how many," Mueller testified. "And I am not certain the IG knows how many either. He has pointed out instances orally to me where there may be persons in a particular office where it was widespread and may be attributable to a lack of understanding and confusion about the procedures."

In Columbia, S.C., for instance, agents said they got approval from the FBI policy office to print the test in advance and use it as a study guide, according to a letter to the inspector general from the FBI Agents Association. The head of the policy office later said that wasn't true, the letter said.

"There are similar stories for practically every office, demonstrating the pervasive confusion and miscommunication that existed," Konrad Motyka, the association's president, wrote May 13 in the letter obtained by The Associated Press.

Mueller told Congress that, despite the cheating investigation, the FBI understands the rules and is following them.

"I do believe that our work force absolutely understands what can be investigated, how it must be investigated, what predication is necessary for a particular investigation in this day and age," Mueller said.

Mueller, himself, appeared shaky on the rules during the questioning, however. He told Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., that the FBI cannot conduct surveillance unless it suspects wrongdoing. FBI rules require no such standard. They allow agents to conduct surveillance proactively, without any evidence that a crime has been committed.

After the hearing, the FBI said, Mueller sent a note to Durbin saying he misspoke. The FBI must have a proper purpose before conducting surveillance, but suspicion of wrongdoing is not required, he said.

Under the Domestic Investigations and Operation Guidelines, FBI agents can also consider race when opening early inquiries. For instance, the FBI could look into whether the terrorist group Lashkar-e Taiba had taken hold in a city if it had a large Pakistani-American presence.

The cheating investigation has heightened skepticism that the FBI understands its own policies.

"They're not actually even doing their homework to know what the rules say," said Michael German, policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union and a former FBI agent.

The FBI has a checkered past when it comes to conducting surveillance. From the late 1950s through the early 1970s, the bureau opened hundreds of thousands of files on Americans and domestic groups, including anti-war organizations, civil rights groups and women's movements. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the bureau collected U.S. phone and computer records without court orders... Read more HERE

BOOKMARK NEW PATRIOT JOURNAL HERE



Comments on this Article:

Comment on this Story

Maybe Mueller needs to pull his head out of his posterior and take a long look at this mess - frankly I don't want cheaters enforcing the laws in my country - already have enough of those in congress and the White House!!
By: Tootsey From: California On: 8/2/2010

If you want to catch terrorists, then you need to give the FBI tools to do that, like surveillance. You will not have evidence of a crime or intent to carry out a terrorist act until you identify a potential threat and investigate that threat. FBI agents are highly trained and incredibly well educated. They are also citizens that have passed a RIGOROUS background check that most of congress, let alone regular civilians could not pass. The article about testing doesn't say that they don't know the information. There are THOUSANDS of regulations FBI agents follow and several layers of checks and balances regarding surveillance. I highly doubt that FBI agents have the time or inclination nowadays to run around listening to civilians discuss our coffee selections, grocery lists or who they "hooked up" with last night. I think that the FBI works hard to keep our country safe and deserves more credit than people are giving them here.
By: Jennifer L. From: Virginia On: 8/1/2010

" ... a lack of understanding and confusion about the procedures" is not acceptable. Sorry, a gross violation of my right to privacy due to "a lack of understanding and confusion about the procedures" is a gross violation of my right to privacy. I was sorely disappointed in Obama when he retained this Bushism, but that he "expanded" the policy is a ridiculous falsehood. Of course those who would have Obama personally responsible for every failure within the executive branch are the same folks who believe the actions of the scoundrels in the Republican administration reflect on themselves alone. Very convenient, that.
By: Stephen Manion From: Texas On: 8/1/2010

It is getting so our country reminds me of 1984 more and more. Its sad. We need to keep the highest standards for the FBI and CIA. The Left cried about the Patriot Act yet stayed silent when Obama expanded it and made it permanent. The left cried they wanted terrorists who were not citizens to have their rights. This Administration wants to be able to walk into any place of business and take the computer records and activities on any employee WITHOUT a court order. Funny how now we are hiring FBI agents who can't pass a test. Makes you wonder how well their background is being checked? After all we know the White House isn't doing a good job of checking backgrounds when we discover one of the unemployed people standing next to the President at his speech in the rose garden. Was a convicted felon who lost her job a month after the conviction on drug charges. What is the Secret Service doing? Now, this Administration wants to take Miranda rights away from citizens if it is believed they are involved in terrorist activities OFF the battlefield. That they can be 'taken out' without trial. Yet again there is silence in the mainstream media and on the left. It is evident that the left only cares about the constitution when it suits their needs and their agenda. They follow Saul Alinsky like he was their God.
By: Patricia From: Arizona On: 7/31/2010

This just goes to show how far the government has fallen. Corrupt politicians, presidents who can;t keep their own word whe they get in office. Now we got a Federal agency that can't even keep its agents in check. Rise up my fellow americans ad put the system back to where civilians have power to make laws that put the criminals behind bars no matter if they are rich or poor. Let's get people elected who want change and not thise influenced by money.
By: Frisc From: Tennessee On: 7/31/2010

"The test was supposed to ensure that FBI agents understand new rules allowing them to conduct surveillance and open files on Americans without evidence of criminal wrongdoing. If agents can't pass that test without cheating, civil liberties groups ask, how can they follow them?" Who really cares is they understand the rules. The process is unconstitutional by nature. This is an example of living in a world where you are guilty until proven innocent and that you have zero privacy. When are we going to wake up and take our rights and freedoms back?
By: Dan From: New Jersey On: 7/31/2010