High-level review set on intelligence before Boston blast
WASHINGTON — The CIA, the Justice Department and Homeland Security Department have introduced a high-level internal review of whether intelligence was mishandled prior to the bombings of the Boston Marathon, officials said.
President Obama told a White House news conference that the review would seek to answer whether “additional things could have been done” that “might have prevented” the twin bombings that killed three people and injured more than 260 on April 15.
“We want to go back, and we want to review every step that was taken,” Obama said. “We want to leave no stone unturned.”
“Based on what I've seen so far, the FBI performed its duties, the Department of Homeland Security did what it was supposed to be doing — but this is hard stuff.”
James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, advised Congress in a memo that Charles McCullough III, chief inspector general for the 16 intelligence agencies, will coordinate the review.
“Director Clapper believes that every agency involved in collecting and sharing information prior to the attack took all the appropriate steps,” said his spokesman, Shawn Turner. “He also believes that it is prudent and appropriate for there to be an independent review of those steps to ensure that nothing was missed.”
The FBI carried out a 90-day investigation and interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2011 after Russian authorities warned that he might have ties to extremist groups. The FBI cleared him at the time, but the CIA put Tsarnaev on a terrorism watch list before he traveled to Russia in January 2012.
Tsarnaev, the alleged mastermind of the bombing, was killed during a shootout with police in Boston on April 19. His younger brother, Dzhokhar, was captured that night and is in custody at a federal prison medical facility in Massachusetts.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.