# The FBI translator who went rogue and married an ISIS terrorist



## Ooh-Rah (May 2, 2017)

Ummm....yeah...so...

The only one happy about this is CIA.  "Thank God she wasn't one of ours" is what I imagine them saying.



Rogue FBI employee married ISIS terrorist she investigated - CNNPolitics.com

An FBI translator with a top-secret security clearance traveled to Syria in 2014 and married a key ISIS operative she had been assigned to investigate, CNN has learned.

The rogue employee, Daniela Greene, lied to the FBI about where she was going and warned her new husband he was under investigation, according to federal court records.

Greene's saga, which has never been publicized, exposes an embarrassing breach of national security at the FBI—an agency that has made its mission rooting out ISIS sympathizers across the country.

It also raises questions about whether Greene received favorable treatment from Justice Department prosecutors who charged her with a relatively minor offense, then asked a judge to give her a reduced sentence in exchange for her cooperation, the details of which remain shrouded in court-ordered secrecy.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (May 2, 2017)

[Q


----------



## amlove21 (May 2, 2017)

This is like an episode of Homeland....


----------



## Topkick (May 2, 2017)

WTF? How does this even happen?


----------



## Il Duce (May 2, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Ummm....yeah...so...
> 
> The only one happy about this is CIA.  "Thank God she wasn't one of ours" is what I imagine them saying.
> 
> ...



Examples like this really concern me about the FBI and CIA.  It's not that they have fuckups - every organization does.  It's the lengths they go to in order to cover up, dismiss, hide, or rebrand those fuckups. 

If you can't be honest, even with yourself - personally or as an organization - how is it possible to get better?  Not to get all political but it's one of the things I think is so damaging about the Trump administration's penchant for lying.  Even if you don't care about the topic he/they are lying about, it's consistently making improvement very difficult by negating the ability to accurately assess.

Say what you will about Manning and Snowden - at least those organizations have had to do an honest accounting of problems.  They're certainly not all fixed - but they're not a secret, and no one in leadership is denying they exist.


----------



## ThunderHorse (May 2, 2017)

Wow...put that bitch back in prison.  That's some legit reporting.


----------



## Topkick (May 2, 2017)

I think this all took place under Obama. And no, I don't want to get all political either.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 2, 2017)

Topkick said:


> I think this all took place under Obama. And no, I don't want to get all political either.



Well Top...

Ya made it 54 posts before your first potential disagree and/or hate.  LOL

The "hate" won't be from me, because I still remember my first (frickin' @Salt USMC  ) but I don't know if you can get away with blaming this on Obama then and close it with "I don't want to get all political".  

Because...that's a pretty political statement.


----------



## Topkick (May 2, 2017)

Your probably right. But I didn't blame Obama, I just stated that he was president. After all, I am not sure what President Trump has to do with it? I was a First Sergeant so my skin is pretty thick. It won't be the first time somebody got their feelings hurt by something I said.


----------



## racing_kitty (May 2, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Well Top...
> 
> Ya made it 54 posts before your first potential disagree and/or hate.  LOL
> 
> ...



Saying it happened during Obama's administration is not quite the same as blaming Obama.  Do you think I blame the 44th President for his Secret Service agents being complete fucking dupes?  Not in the least.  However, you can truthfully say that the USSS does not perform as well during the Trump administration as they did during the Bush 41 or even the Clinton administration, and it not cast blame on POTUS 45.  Let's not put words in other people's mouths.  They don't taste the same as crayons.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 2, 2017)

Sometimes I have to remind myself that I did not vote for Obama, because it sure feels like I defend him more than I'd like to.



racing_kitty said:


> Saying it happened during Obama's administration is not quite the same as blaming Obama.



Disagree - I think that whether you are overtly blaming or not, simply linking the incident to his administration is insinuating that Obama was in someway responsible.


----------



## ThunderHorse (May 2, 2017)

We call that Command Climate in the Army and had to take surveys...


----------



## Il Duce (May 2, 2017)

I think this one is my fault - I should have used a different example on the honest assessment piece rather than the current President.

To try again, I think the FBI and CIA - more than any other agencies in the IC - have very skilled public relations departments and a keen sense of public perception and the power they're able to gain from it.  I don't mean power in a pejorative sense - I mean agencies fighting for funding, good recruits, the ear of policymakers, etc. - the type of thing every agency jockies for.  I think when you look at the history of the FBI and CIA though - right up until today - you see agencies very reluctant to admit their mistakes or give them a public hearing.  It creates a culture of trying to cover up mistakes - and all the institutional abuses that go with that - but most egregiously (and I think unintentionally) is it creates a culture that makes it very difficult to correct the structural things that caused those mistakes, other than the dipshittery of individuals which is always one of the proximate causes.

Hopefully a less controversial political example was the reluctance of SECDEF Rumsfeld and to a lesser extent the office of the vice President during 2003-04 to admit there was any kind of insurgency brewing or fighting in Iraq.  It stemmed, at least partially, from a reluctance to admit planning or execution errors they had explicitly highlighted during the run up - we'll be greeted as liberators, you don't need a large occupying force, Iraq will pay us back, etc.  In reality plans and execution are always messy, it's not an indictment to get something wrong early, make shifts, and come out on top.  But, the unwillingness to admit to errors meant an unwillingness to examine them, make changes, and correct in time to make an impact.  For all those things I think the DoD as an institution really suffered - by attempting to toe the party line with the SECDEF.

I think a great counter-example is the USMC.  Of all the services I think they're the most sensitive to image, brand, public/policymaker perception, etc.  I also think they do the best job of making their public case - not every time but most times.  But, instead of trying to hide or cover up most mistakes - they are up front with the error and also the changes.  Take DADT as a great example.  The USMC was the most staunch in wanting to maintain the policy - but once the change was made they embraced execution wholeheartedly and very effectively.  In both cases they never tried to hide anything - the commandant was up front in public statements (that matched his reported private statements) before and after the repeal.  I think there are a lot of lessons for institutions - especially law enforcement and intelligence agencies - and when I see stories like this I fear those agencies are not learning them.  Or worse, learning the wrong lessons (i.e. do a better job with internal suppression).


----------



## ThunderHorse (May 2, 2017)

The optics of this look like crap. She needed 20 years or worse. This is one of those things where you don't make deals and you make an example of them.


----------



## Gunz (May 2, 2017)

Some people need their heads cut off.


----------



## Kraut783 (May 2, 2017)

heh, I remember when this happened...it was shocking.


----------



## Polar Bear (May 2, 2017)

Is she HOT?


----------



## racing_kitty (May 2, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Disagree - I think that whether you are overtly blaming or not, simply linking the incident to his administration is insinuating that Obama was in someway responsible.



I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 2, 2017)

racing_kitty said:


> I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.



Okay.


----------



## Kraut783 (May 2, 2017)

heh, love is a crazy thing...even if briefly.  Cuspert has the gift of gab.


----------



## ThunderHorse (May 2, 2017)

A lawyer friend asks me: why do we have laws that allow us to revoke citizenship if we don't do it in this case.  My response was that I'd prefer she was shot.


----------



## DA SWO (May 3, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Well Top...
> 
> Ya made it 54 posts before your first potential disagree and/or hate.  LOL
> 
> ...


Disagree because the previous post with "not to to get all political" then took a shot at Trump.
He was responding with a fact.


----------



## Topkick (May 3, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> Disagree because the previous post with "not to to get all political" then took a shot at Trump.
> He was responding with a fact.



That was exactly my intent


----------

