The Part of the Story “Shirtless FBI Guy” Left Out

The NYT has a nice story about Frederick Humphries, the FBI Agent who started the investigation into Paula Broadwell’s emails. It talks about how aggressively he pursued Millenium Plotter Ahmed Ressam and other terrorism cases. It quotes two unnamed colleagues vouching for him (though admitting he has conservative political views). It even offers a sort of an explanation for why he sent a shirtless picture of himself to Jill Kelley.

Mr. Berger took issue with news media reports that have said his client sent shirtless pictures of himself to Ms. Kelley.

“That picture was sent years before Ms. Kelley contacted him about this, and it was sent as part of a larger context of what I would call social relations in which the families would exchange numerous photos of each other,” Mr. Berger said.

The photo was sent as a “joke” and was of Mr. Humphries “posing with a couple of dummies.” Mr. Berger said the picture was not sexual in nature.

But it leaves out two key parts of the story. First, his lawyer, Lawrence Berger, rather ridiculously claimed that going to Eric Cantor–rather than someone with oversight over DOJ or Intelligence–constituted normal whistleblower process.

In regard to his client speaking with Mr. Cantor, Mr. Berger declined to address the issue, saying only that his client “had followed F.B.I. protocols.”

“No one tries to become a whistle-blower,” he said. “Consistent with F.B.I. policy, he referred it to the proper component.”

More significantly, though the story repeats the report that Humphries’ superiors believed he was sniffing around the case improperly, the story doesn’t explain what he did to make them think so.

Mr. Humphries passed on Ms. Kelley’s complaint to the cybersquad in the Tampa field office but was not assigned to the case. He was later admonished by supervisors who thought he was trying to insert himself improperly into the investigation.

Given that no one has definitively explained who at FBI told Kelley that Broadwell had sent the emails–which set off a chain that led Broadwell to learning someone knew she was the culprit–there are some very inappropriate ways Humphries might have been involved.

But the NYT does tell a very nice story.

78 replies
  1. FrankProbst says:

    If the picture is a joke and totally innocent, is there any reason why we can’t see it? Surely he still has a copy. After all, he knew exactly which photo everyone was talking about.

    Also, I’m still trying to figure out what the hell Broadwell was thinking. She lawyered up, THEN voluntarily let the FBI search her house, and they found a bunch of unsecured classified information on her computer, which caused her to lose her security clearance. It seems like both she and her lawyer were extraordinarily stupid and just put one more nail in her career coffin, no? bmaz, what’s your take here?

  2. Frank33 says:

    These Dummies have been left out to dry and thrown under the bus. Show us the Dummies President Obama, and let us see if they have been abused.

  3. allan says:

    As a Middle Aged Male (MAM), I have to ask what the hell is up with these shirtless MAM photos.
    Anthony Wiener, Chris Lee and Frederick Humphries must live in an alternate universe if they think this going to be a turn on for a heterosexual female.

    As for ” … who at FBI told Kelley that Broadwell had sent the emails …”,
    that is indeed a very interesting question.

  4. SpanishInquisition says:

    @FrankProbst: “It seems like both she and her lawyer were extraordinarily stupid and just put one more nail in her career coffin, no? bmaz, what’s your take here?”

    The thing is, what career? I’m saying that only half-jokingly since her only job seemed to be Military Mistress. She was not active duty nor was she even a biographer since someone else actually ghostwrote All In – I guess her getting put her name on it without having to write it was under-the-table payment for being a mistress.

    Also she’s in a position where the worse it is for her, the worse it is for the Obama administration. The Obama administration has already denied this was a national security issue and if the Obama administration pursues Military Mistress, it will only eat up more news cycles in ways not flattering to the WH.

  5. bmaz says:

    @FrankProbst: @SpanishInquisition:

    Well, I ahve been discussing this off blog with some folks. There is a variety of opinion. Mine has not changed, I think Broadwell cut an agreement behind the scenes and we are just watching it play out.

    If that is not the case, for the life of me I see no way a competent lawyer lets an unrestricted search without a warrant of his client’s house occur.

  6. SebastianDangerfield says:

    Bob Muse — Broadwell’s lawyer — ain’t no dummy. There certainly is a reason (or reasons) for going “open kimono” with the FBI. Not clear at all what they are, as we’re all blind men gathered around an elephant here. Bmaz has wondered whether she secured a deal, but i don’t think that likely since it would involve securing a deal at world-record-setting speed (bear in mind that an AUSA or USA would have to sign off on it). Could be that the legal diagnosis was: “You’re proper fucked so you’d best be co-operative in order to beg for charging leniency and shave years off a sentence later.” That seems crazily harsh and perhaps not good representation but possible. After all, Broadwell in her Denver speech didn’t just report what Fox News had reported — she flat out said that Petraeus knew these things because there was a report from the CIA station within 24 hours and she also made reference to signal intelligence. (Don’t get that; seems reckless.) Or, perhaps there’s something bigger and deeper happening and it’s clear to Broadwell and Muse that that bigger deeper thing is what FBI is hunting.

  7. guest1b says:

    She is/was a PhD candidate at Kings College London. Her previous qualifications (2 masters degrees) and positions (eg Harvard) suggests she was seeking an academic career.

    Interesting that no media outlets seem to have contacted KCL about Broadwell’s candidature. Any research involving human subjects requires approval from the Research Ethics office and is subject to ongoing review and reporting. Universities take this very, very seriously. Breaches can mean research is not being accepted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, which is the main currency of academia. Some funding bodies will withdraw ALL funding to an institutaion (and not just the offending project) if breaches are serious enough.

  8. greengiant says:

    @SebastianDangerfield: Are they chasing leakers of Benghazi gate? The ones who reported the ex-Seals were lighting up enemy positions and leaped to the conclusion there were arms in the air?
    Issa’s minion Chaffetz seemed to be running from leakers. If the right is going after fast and furious, Seal team 6ers and October surprises they should expect blowback.
    Someone already pointed out Broadwell’s connections and history, and her following Rove’s playbook of dump all data on the FBI.

  9. bmaz says:

    @SebastianDangerfield: Well, yes. But, as you know, there are formal and informal deals. Frankly, on a high button gig like this, I am not so sure that there was not an AUSA and DOJ Main guy right there to do whatever deed could or must be done anyway. In fact, I would be shocked if there was not given that two command grade Generals, and a boatload of shit at an inopportune time for the Administration were in play. Is it in writing? No clue. But, from what I have been able to grok about Muse (I knew squat about him before this, but have checked the book on him since), he is nobody’s fool. There is some kind of agreement paly going on, else the search isn’t going on out of the blue like that.

  10. eCAHNomics says:

    @Jason Leopold: If you’re addicted, you can spend 46 minutes on Corbett. The first part is a more interesting take on “access” journalism (just the jogging part alone) than I’ve seen elsewhere.

    Around 31 minutes it gets really interesting, tying current events to 2008 break into prez candidates’ passport files. Brennan, a candidate for replacement for Pet. was CEO behind one of the corps that hacked the passport files.

  11. Lapata says:

    Is Petraeus not human? What’s more dodgy is that he was on her dissertation committee.

    For a while I couldn’t figure out why a PhD student needed a ghostwriter, but after reading this post, it wasn’t hard to figure out why:

    I think she is/was trying to pursue an academic career, and if I know academia, she will eventually succeed even though she can’t write, and has just had the door closed on her research methods.

  12. Kathleen says:

    Tonight on Hardball Micheal Isikoff and David Corn made light of the whole affair. Was it Isikoff who kept digging on the Clinton BJ scandal? He does not seem so interested in sniffing very deep on this story

  13. JohnT says:

    I haven’t been able to keep up with this but someone mentioned MacDill AFB in the previous thread.

    That’s interesting. I don’t know if this has any bearing on anything, but MacDill is the home of the USAF center for strategy and technology, and the link to this report has been passed around for years

    Prolly just a coincidence. But maybe there’s something more to the story

  14. eCAHNomics says:

    @JohnT: Anything in the report about drones? I.E. threat to USAF bc they are run by CIA & don’t req pilots.

    Anything about Triple Canopy?

  15. guest says:

    I have to say the shirtless FBI guy was a the first disappointment in this savory new scandal, even if it was taken years ago when he had something covering that light bulb shaped dome. Maybe he took his shirt off to distract the Maronite MILF from his truly unfortunate face. I’ll take him at his word, it *had* to be a joke.

    Second and more serious disappointment is the deal theory. I can’t believe she made a deal to turn on St David. I think the MILF and to a lesser extent too sexy for his shirt Right Wing Fred will take the fall, and the “heroes” will be rehabilitated.

    Even without understanding what happened, I can make one confident prediction: Obama is the one who will be the biggest target, no matter what he has done so far, or does going forward, right or wrong. What are the odds the special prosecutor will be sworn in before the inauguration? Oh well. Karma is a bitch.

  16. eCAHNomics says:

    Korb on presstv. Heh, presstv getting higher profile U.S. talking heads.

    He’s playing the role of the U.S. shill. Shows that presstv is less afraid of dissenting guests than U.S. media is allowed to be. Big neocon Izzie cheerleader (forget exactly who) was on presstv earlier today, LOL.

  17. ryan says:

    @SpanishInquisition: As someone who has done some editing on occasion, I’ll just say that it’s a big jump from having a ‘ghostwriter’ to not being a biographer. If she wanted Loeb to help her shape the material, more power to her. I’m sure Loeb didn’t need her fame and connections, so if she wasn’t the biographer, why’s her name on the project at all. Other people send crap to the editors and let them sort it out. This probably went to the publishing house in better shape than most manuscripts.

  18. SebastianDangerfield says:

    @guest1b: My guess, but only a semi-educated guess, all along has been that KCL let Paula know that her hero-worship was not dissertation material — and perhaps by implication that she was not KCL PhD material — thus prompting her sudden turn to popular writing.

  19. ryan says:

    @SpanishInquisition: On a more substantive point, I actually don’t think a Petraeus/Allen scandal hurts Obama nearly as much as others seem to think. They were bipartisan consensus candidates for their positions, and most people who are aware at all would identify Petraeus as a Republican.

  20. ryan says:

    @guest1b: True, and her self-professed goal was NSA.

    I’m with GhostPirate – cutting a deal suggests that she feels they’ve already got a case against her. They’ve publically said they don’t (not that that means much), and nothing I saw prior to the search made me think they had anything.

  21. eCAHNomics says:

    @SebastianDangerfield: I observe that one can get a PhD from any institution with any POS. To take the highest profile case, Bernanke’s much touted work on Great Depression is below dreck. Given how much PTB own Poison Ivy & other universities, getting a hagiography of Pet accepted as PhD thesis would be easy peasy.

    I have no direct evidence. Just saying from what else I have observed on the subject.

  22. b2020 says:

    In such a target-rich environment, we reconstruct the minutiae of the missing shirt then? OK.

    One unrelated observation I have not seen elsewhere so far: Obama has always placed a priority on co-opting and eliminating re-election threats. See Clinton @ State, and other cabinet appointments. Petraeus, given his focused campaign for his career, was an Issue.

    Hastings recaps: “[I]n 2004, during the middle of a presidential election, Petraeus wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post supporting President Bush and saying that the Iraq policy was working. … In Afghanistan, he first underhandedly pushed the White House into escalating the war in September 2009 (calling up columnists to “box” the president in) and waged a full-on leak campaign to undermine the White House policy process.”

    I am not fully on-board with respect to the claim Petraeus “manipulated Obama into the” Afghanistan surge – the Washington consensus aligned both of them neatly – but he certainly – again – interfered with a process reserved for elected officials. Whether or not Obama wound up doing what he wanted to do anyway, his highly developed sense for challenges – in a confrontation of narcissists that understood each other perfectly – must have but Petraeus squarely in his cross-hairs.

    Hence, Obama ultimately places Petraeus in charge of the Afghanistan campaign that the insurgent general has leaked and agitated for. The calculus is clear: Any success could be spun as Obama’s, any failures could likely be blamed on Petraeus. Various shadow punches regarding “enough” vs. “too few” soldiers follow. Petraeus manages to prevent his failures from becoming visible and recognized – Obama is in a bind inasmuch he fully buys into COIN and surge, and cannot fail the man without failing the strategy.

    So Petraeus is back, and Hastings – i.e. Broadwell – records the next Obama counter-move: “Gates tells [Petraeus] the post of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the military’s top job, is ‘out the question’.”

    The general receives an offer he cannot refuse – the top job of the CIA, requiring him to keep a low profile, cutting him off from his power base and network – the military – and transplanting him to – again – serve or fail Obama’s overbearing ambition to militarize the covert executive.

    I have no idea what Obama’s next move would have been, but a soap opera of megalomaniacs and incompetents – in the FBI, among Tampa’s Military-Socialite Complex, and then whistle-blown Republicans and hysterical media serfs almost delivered a blow-up doll into the last weeks of the campaign. He might have looked forward to accepting Petraeus resignation for a fleeting moment or two, ready to close his account, but this has snowballed beyond his control, and given Republican incompetence and incontinence, there is every risk that we double back from “Saving General Allen” to “she-said-he-said” Rice vs. CIA on Benghazi, to Boardwell on CIA prisoners in Libya, to Petraeus arming militias in Libya…

    Which, in a sense of blind justice, is exactly what Obama deserves. His little gambit of sending his personal MacArthur to the Khyber was paid for by thousands of dead US soldiers, tens of thousands crippled, uncounted numbers of civilians killed, maimed, abducted, tortured in Afghanistan, and worst, another Bush era failed policy – that of a COIN-facilitated Iraqi civil war to recover from a failed Petraeusian Surge – continued and justified for decades of future failure and mayhem.

    I’d say that, no matter who took of whose shirt and when, this is where the bodies are, and maybe there will be too much freewheeling incompetence in this media circus to carry this beyond shirts and sex, and straight to the man who embedded himself in the White House. If that’s what it takes to get some modicum of justice for the crimes of those two wannabe-Caesars, I’d take it.

  23. SebastianDangerfield says:

    @bmaz: Fair ’nuff. Extraordinary case means perhaps it’s not remarkable for a world-record-setting deal. I’d guess it’s informal at present but with indicia of bona fides. What would her leverage be? Dunno. Perhaps she gots something they want or something they don’t want getting out. Which is to say, in answer to @greengiant, I have no frackin’ clue. All I have to go by is my knowledge of Muse’s canniness and my other-thread speculation about what Jilly’s been up to.

  24. guest52 says:


    Broadwell is still a reservist, is she not? More to the point, she is still subject to the UMCJ, and, up until this broke, she might have still held security clearance.

    Could the lack of fight over the search of her house be a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation?

    She says no, prosecution under UCMJ for adultery, discharge from reserves, loss of security clearance, never get a job in the military intelligence complex ever again.

  25. Frank33 says:

    I dare not venture into Freeperville. But Rushbo Limbaugh and other vast wingnut propagandists were pushing “Benghazi Wolverines!” That is, we must have revenge for Benghazi. And the President’s failure to send Killer Drones and Blackwater Snipers is omnishambles.

    Some such neo-cons think it is a conspiracy to destroy the military leadership that has led us into ten year quagmires.

    I hope so and I am glad to help with that conspiracy.

  26. allan says:

    Hosenball: “Two officials familiar with the case said investigators are asking whether Broadwell followed government rules for handling classified information.”

    Would government rules apply since she wasn’t a government employee?

  27. joanneleon says:

    @b2020: This is one of the most insightful comments that I have seen so far.

    Just to comment on one part of it, I also have a feeling that maybe this was planned but has snowballed out of control too, in the way that you have described it.

    And I still think it is, at least in part, tied to the Benghazi situation, the cover up and the attempted October surprise and that there could be blowback for both warring factions here at home.

  28. joanneleon says:

    @allan: Does it matter if she is a goverment employee? I would think that anyone with a clearance is bound by the same rules regarding classified info.

  29. Guest52 says:

    I took a look at some articles with her background.

    Broadwell is a Lt Col in the Army Reserves. She was promoted to that rank in August 2012.

  30. rg says:

    Regarding your remark about “normal whistle-blower process”, I note that Juan Cole has reported a couple of bits on this saga that are new (well, new to me). The pertinent one is that the live-in sister of Jill Kelly has as her legal expertise the area of whistle-blower law.

  31. Valley Girl says:

    I admit haven’t had time to read all comments.

    But might be interesting to get Coleen Rowley’s take on FBI behavior.

    Looked for her email addy, which I used have when she was running for Congress, but alas, couldn’t find.

    But, perhaps other peeps can.

  32. orionatl says:


    not that i can make certain sense of this,

    but she was (allegedly) military intell.

    the appropiate question would not be “does she
    have classified docs?”

    but “does she have classified docs she had no need to have?”

  33. greenbird says:

    Petraeus to testify in Congress on Libya Friday
    AP foreign, Thursday November 15 2012

    AP Intelligence Writer WASHINGTON (AP) — Former CIA Director David Petraeus will testify before the House Intelligence committee Friday on events that led to the death of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans in an attack on the U.S. Consulate at Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11.

    Spokesmen for the committee say the hearing will be closed to the public.

    Petraeus resigned from the CIA last week after acknowledging an extramarital affair. The liaison was discovered during an FBI investigation of harassing emails allegedly sent by Petraeus’ biographer and mistress, Paula Broadwell, to Tampa socialite Jill Kelley. Broadwell allegedly saw Kelley as a rival.

    The probe expanded to include Kelley’s copious communications with the top U.S. commander In Afghanistan, Marine Gen. John Allen.

  34. Watson says:

    WaPo says that Paula Broadwell’s driver’s license was found in Rock Creek Park on Monday. That strikes me as quite sinister.

    A jogger might lose the wallet containing their license, but JUST the license? Why would she take it out during a run?

    It seems more likely to me that this was arranged as a warning to her.

  35. guest says:

    @Watson: Most women don’t carry wallets like men. They might have a big thing with credit cards and DL inside their purses, but most of those would not fit in your pants pocket (not that women’s pants often have pockets) and definitely not in the little pockets typical for running shorts. When you go jogging, usually all you want is your key to get back in the house, and maybe some ID if you are anal, in case you get hit by a car or stopped by a cop.

  36. guest says:

    the appropiate question would not be “does she
    have classified docs?”

    but “does she have classified docs she had no need to have?”

    Just because you have clearance to *view* classified documents does not mean you are allowed to make copies of them or take them home with you – especially if your house is not secured. Any government employee can be sanctioned, fired or in some cases imprisoned for not keeping government property in their possession secure, especially information, even information that is not classified. And just because you are cleared to view certain types of information, you need to have a business purpose related to your duties for viewing it, you can’t just go browsing.

  37. guest1b says:

    @guest: How does her PhD work fit into this? Could some of the documents be related to the PhD case study? (Case study research would require ‘triangulation’ from multiple sources, not just any interview transcripts that were produced.)

    Also, I’ve read elsewhere that consenting to FBI monitoring is a requirement of gaining security clearances. Could this be why there was apparently no warrant needed to search the emails, house and computers?

  38. mcville says:

    So when the actual story of the “shirtless FBI guy” comes out, it looks much less about sex than the way it was originally portrayed. Why is that?

    Have you seen the latest about Jill trying to collect an $80 million finders fee on a no-bid contract at the Republican Convention?

    Shades of Lead21 and Lincoln Group?

  39. P J Evans says:

    That’s my guess.

    I’m wondering if the sisters thought they were marrying into money and an easy life, and Kelley decided that sending tidbits of information to her sister was a good way to improve her sister’s status. (Given that her then brother-in-law was involved with the provisional authority, he could be assumed to Know People.)

  40. SpanishInquisition says:

    @mcville: I think the Obama administration wants to do everything they can to destroy the agents’ credibility because amongst many other reasons they want to have an excuse for not telling Congress about something that was clearly a national security investigation despite the official claim that it was merely about “human drama.”

    Also in regards to the no-bid contract that was for the South Korean government doing a no-bid contract, not the US government. Aparently Kelley claimed Petraeus was entitled to a freebie and that Kelley could get that freebie. The one who talked to her ending up thinking she didn’t know what she was talking about.

  41. FrankProbst says:

    Re: Broadwell. Thank you, bmaz, for chiming in. I can’t see how she lets her house get searched without a deal in place. As for her future career, I think she’s pretty much done for. You aren’t going to get a PhD if it turns out you’re boinking the subject of your thesis. Yes, there are a lot of inappropriate relationships in academia, but once your affair is on CNN, you’re really not going to be able to cut any corners. Her military career is also likely finished. I can’t see her getting her security clearance back. She doesn’t qualify for wingnut welfare–she’s basically the whore of Babylon who brought down the honorable Petraeus. I think she’s stuck being a stay-at-home-mom, assuming her marriage survives. (Her husband likely makes more than enough for the two of them to live on. Interventional radiology pays quite well.)

    Re: Petraeus. Wingnut welfare within a month or two. His testimony on Benghazi is really irrelevant. John Q. Public is largely unaware that we’re still fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most people have already forgotten Benghazi. The blame for what–if anything–went wrong there is going to get thrown back and forth between the CIA and State. It’s not going to touch Obama.

    Re: Allen. I don’t see him holding on much longer. Maybe the e-mails were just flirtatious, in which case he might survive, but I doubt it. Kelley’s hired the big guns, so she obviously is worried about something. Odds are, it’s Allen.

    Re: Kelley. The ditzy socialite routine is obviously an act. She called in the big guns right away, so she’s nobody’s fool. She’s an asset to someone. I think that the dirty e-mail routine may have been to track the movements of some high-ranking military people. It should be relatively easy to figure out, generally speaking, where an e-mail is being sent from. You may not have GPS co-ordinates, but you would probably be able to figure out what city/country someone is in, which could be useful information. I’m curious as to how she’s paying the big guns, since she’s supposedly already millions in debt.

    Re: Shirtless FBI guy. He really does appear to have been smeared, and he really did blow the lid on something that the FBI appeared to be ready to cover up. He may not have gone through the appropriate channels, but I think he really should be considered a “whistleblower”. I’ll bet he leaves the FBI with his pension and a nice settlement.

    Re: The Broadwell/Kelley e-mails. Pure speculation here, but I wonder if Broadwell ever actually used Petraeus’ name in any of those threatening e-mails. Kelley may have gotten a bunch of e-mails about “my guy” and assumed they referred to Allen, not Petraeus. It would be a delicious irony if it turned out that Kelley called the FBI because she thought someone was threatening her about her relationship with Allen, when in fact they were threatening her about her (potentially innocuous) relationship with Petraeus.

  42. klynn says:


    He has a background in uncovering “the cover-up”. He worked on Watergate.

    Here is his bio:

    His firm is of Monica Lewinsky fame.
    He defended Sam Morrison in an espionage case back in the mid 80’s.

    Why in the world is Robert Raben making quotes in the media on this event?

    And is there a link to this Mcville @ 59?

    “Have you seen the latest about Jill trying to collect an $80 million finders fee on a no-bid contract at the Republican Convention?”

    My gosh that stands out after watching the Romney quote from the tape of his exclusive fund raiser held at the home of Marc Leder in Boca Raton, FL about how he would take advantage of a Jimmy Carter moment.

  43. Jeff Kaye says:

    Humphries is more than he seems to be, or has been reported. His link to the dubious Ressam case, which is itself tied into Zubaydah, the AQ terrorist tales that are the original backing to the “war on terror”, is important. He was put in charge of that case as only a 3rd year FBI man, which seems odd (it may not be).

    But the most interesting fact I could dig up is that before his FBI days, he was a Captain in Military Intelligence. That has not been mentioned thus far, and given the nature of this particular scandal, may have some meaning.

  44. ryan says:

    @klynn: Please note that the lang commenter referred to in another thread is a ludicrous dufus. Trying to insinuate an Israeli link based on her family background, he got Broadwell’s middle name completely wrong. (Well, to be fair, he did manage to use a name that rhymes with her real middle name. Close enough for ex-CIA?) The only available religious reference for her on google is that her mother facebook-liked a Christian women’s group.

  45. eppelheim says:

    @FrankProbst: Re: The Broadwell/Kelley emails.

    Daily Beast says they did make one reference to Petraeus, but that they were otherwise “oblique.” And we know that Kelley contacted the FBI *only after* Allen received one of the anonymous Broadwell missives. This letter warned Allen to stay away from Kelley, which now looks like perfectly good advice. Except that Allen’s reaction was to forward it on to Kelley. Kelley had of course also been receiving her own anonymous letters in the meantime, so it looks like she was willing to sit on the whole problem until she had some inkling that she might be the subject of a broader smear campaign. Then she fished out an old business card some acquaintance had given her and called the FEds. This summer, though, she’d come to regret that course of action and tried to withdraw her complaint.

    From all of this, we learn a) that Kelley is not a spy, because b) she is an idiot who c) did not properly appreciate the implications of inviting the FBI to investigate (i.e., that she’d just put the Feds onto her email account). Also, d) she’s not a witless ditz either, as she quickly recognized that having government investigators going through her email was a Bad Thing, which implies that e) she knew full well that she was up to something, and that f) that something involved, inter alia, email correspondence. Also, g) we have a hint, despite all her shortcomings, of Kelley’s potential utility to other parties, foreign and domestic. In this specific case, she cheerfully led the FBI into the email accounts of two four-star generals. In other cases (have there been other cases?) who knows?

  46. klynn says:


    I simply linked to a personality piece on a woman’s blog that mentioned she did participate in a cadet exchange program in Israel. It was a blog about woman and success and Broadwell was interviewed for the piece.

  47. P J Evans says:

    My understanding is she was going for 2% ‘commission’ on a deal with an $80 million potential, so she was asking for a couple of million. The people she was dealing with talked to her a couple of times and decided she didn’t know what she was doing.

  48. P J Evans says:

    I read one news story today about Kelley, in which she was referred to as ‘Tampa Kardashian’. Apparently she expected everyone else to fix stuff for her, and they were getting tired of that. It apparently wouldn’t have been long before she and her husband would have been looking for a greener pasture.

  49. JohnT says:

    @eCAHNomics: Don’t think it has anything about drones. Maybe it does, haven’t read through it all.

    But the interesting thing about it that caught people’s eyes was the weather modification using Tesla technology.

    And not sure about Triple Canopy either

Comments are closed.