by Mike Dorning and Bay Fang
BECKLEY, W.Va.—The State Department's inspector general is investigating three contract employees -- two fired and one disciplined -- who improperly accessed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s private passport files, the department confirmed Thursday.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said two employees were fired and one disciplined for accessing the files on three separate occasions this year -- one as recently as last week.
The incident immediately stirred memories of a scandal in the 1992 campaign when pages were removed from the passport files of Bill Clinton, who at the time was challenging the re-election of then-President George H.W. Bush.
An Obama campaign spokesman immediately demanded a “complete investigation,” including the identities of the people who accessed the files and their possible motives. In a hastily scheduled conference call with reporters late Thursday night after news of the security breach broke, McCormack declined to identify the employees involved but said the improper access was uncovered through internal department controls.
“This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years,” Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement e-mailed to reporters.
Initially, however, there could be one significant difference between the workers who looked at Obama's records and the passport search during Clinton's campaign:
The last time a Democratic presidential candidate’s passport records were rifled by a Republican administration – in 1992 – it led to a bigger investigation. Joseph diGenova, a former U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., was appointed independent counsel in December 1992.
Then, it was a high-ranking State Department official, acting assistant secretary for legislative affairs Steven K. Berry, who had gone through Clinton’s passport files during the election campaign. State’s inspector general, Sherman Funk, said Berry had helped arrange a search in an effort to find politically damaging information about Clinton.
Whether this is a case of curiosity or not, the Obama campaign is demanding an investigation.
“Our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes,'' Burton said. "This is a serious matter that merits a complete investigation, and we demand to know who looked at Senator Obama’s passport file, and for what purpose, and why it took so long for them to reveal this security breach.''
McCormack said the department was not certain whether or not the reason for the improper access was a case of simple, though improper, curiosity.
“We believe this was out of imprudent curiosity, so we are taking steps to reassure ourselves that that is, in fact, the case,'' McCormack said. "Our initial take is that we're not being dismissive of any other possibility.''
The files were accessed Jan. 9, Feb. 21 and March 14, according to the State Department.
The improper access was detected through a computerized monitoring system put in place after the 1992 election scandal that tracks access to the passport files of high-profile individuals. If such a file is accessed, the employee is asked for an explanation and if the explanation is unsatisfactory, a supervisor is notifed.
"Certain contract employees have access to the computer system. Each of the three employees had permission to access the applications,” said Undersecretary of State Pat Kennedy, who joined the conference call with reporters.
Obama’s Senate office was notified of the unauthorized access on Thursday afternoon, according to both McCormack and Burton.
Only now, the State Department says, is the inspector general starting to look into a case which first involved some possible “curiosity’’ in January.
The prosecutor in the last campaign-season passport search, diGenova, said in interviews with MSNBCand CNN last night that the fact that the two employees of outside firms already have been fired will prevent State’s inspector general from forcing them to talk because they are no longer government employees.
The former independent counsel also suggested that a failure to start investigating the newest breach sooner suggests “gross incompetence.’’ DiGenova told CNN: "This looks like, for the moment, big government gone wild at the lowest levels.''
Mark Silva contributed to this report.





Comments
The fact that Senator Obama's passport files were viewed by 3 different individuals and the timing of the breaches makes this all very suspicious.
At a minimum, it reinforces the sheer incompetence of the Bush administration.
Posted by: Enrique | March 21, 2008 8:38 AM
Yup, definitely a Republican Presidential move. The same happened to Bill Clinton in 1992. Why should Obama be surprised? Oh yes, he is naive in dealing with Republicans! It is great to have such a peace keeping quality, but POLITICS can't change in 1 year. You have to run with the big dogs. I think Obama needs to go on a peace keeping mission for the Nobel Peace Prize like Al Gore did. He would be much better suited for that than president...make a great Secretary of State
Posted by: Dar | March 21, 2008 9:03 AM
The "gross incompetence" tag accurately describes George Bush's life, but it doesn't describe this situation. It happens too often with these people, e.g., Iraq war intelligence, Abu Ghraib, Valerie Plame, deleted e-mails, etc.
Anyone who's dealt with career civil service types in the government -- not the contractors here, but the managers above them -- knows that they actually tend to be highly competent and knowledgeable. The "mistakes" happen because senior management -- political appointees -- made sure that middle management understood that they were to happen.
It's difficult to avoid the conclusion that none of the above "mistakes" were actually inadvertent.
To those who ascribe this stuff to HRC, get real. While it's certainly something you might expect her to be involved with, these "contractors" get there because of their political allegiance (ever hear of a company called "Blackwater"?). Since HRC (likely) did not have anything to do with these contractors, you pretty much have to look to Dear Leader on this one too.
Posted by: a blinkin | March 21, 2008 9:07 AM
Has Obama done ANYTHING in his career except TALK??? How anyone can back this guy is beyond me!
Posted by: McCain in '08 | March 21, 2008 9:14 AM
How about jail time???? Isn't this criminal??
Posted by: Michele Kenney | March 21, 2008 9:28 AM
Give me a break Enrique. The State Department is still filled with a bunch of Clinton cronies.
Posted by: Tim | March 21, 2008 9:31 AM
Well, my prudent curiosity leads me to ask the question, "About what were these people curious?"
Imprudent Curiosity - State Dept. Fires 2
It doesn't matter who you support for the Presidency, we should all be concerned about this.
Posted by: Stormwarning | March 21, 2008 9:37 AM
Well, now Obama knows what it's like to be a regular American. Having their personal information stolen and hacked into.
Posted by: Lola | March 21, 2008 9:52 AM
Give me a break Enrique. The State Department is still filled with a bunch of Clinton cronies.
Posted by: Tim | March 21, 2008 9:31 AM
You don't have the first clue how our government works, do you? To the victor go the spoils. Bush replaced Clinton's cronies with his own, as anyone would do in the same position.
I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the Contractors here are major Bush/Republicant donors.
Posted by: a blinkin | March 21, 2008 9:56 AM
I absolutely love the State Department's rationalization about this issue.
"McCormack said the department was not certain whether or not the reason for the improper access was a case of simple, though improper, curiosity."
They don't know why the records were looked at, but they are CERTAIN that it was just for curiosity and nothing nefarious.
Can someone please tell me HOW you come up with THAT conclusion?
Beyond the Obama issue, this sort of puts a HUGE hole in the administration's argument that the only records that are being looked at in the war on terror are those that relate to terrorists.
"If you did nothing wrong, you don't have anything to worry about." NOT.
Posted by: dogjudge | March 21, 2008 9:56 AM
Poor Obama someone saw his passport file is there something in there he's worried about? Has he dotted all his i's and crossed all his t's.
The Obama camp have all but imploded from his big mouth and now W did it. Blame everything on W Obama your campaign is clearly in trouble and you are looking for damage control. Yada, Yada, Yada!
Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | March 21, 2008 9:57 AM
Why are contract workers employed by the State Department with access to highly confidential information? Shouldn't the person who's decision it was to hire contractors be fired too?
Posted by: Amazed | March 21, 2008 10:06 AM
Hey Jerry White -
Are you at all aware that what happened to Obama (and Clinton in 1992) is illegal? And that only members of the Bush administration could gain this kind of illegal access?
This has nothing to do with "dotting i's and crossing t's", this is a major and un-American invasion of privacy.
I'm well aware that different rules apply to Republicans (i.e. if this had happened to McCain, you'd be screaming about it being un-Patriotic, or somehow Bill Clinton's fault!), but try to keep some perspective.
I hope someday your private records are looked at then publicized for the world to see so that we may all proclaim, "Poor Jerry White".
Posted by: Anonymous | March 21, 2008 10:13 AM
Who are the contractors?
Blackwater is one, that was confirmed by a source in the State Department but is being hushed up to prevent a national inquiry into the Republican partied use of their snooping abilities, inm fact Balckwater taps phones uses US satellites to spy on Americans all the time. The other is probably a didivison of Halliburton.
Posted by: Blackwater Bob | March 21, 2008 10:15 AM
Poor Obama someone saw his passport file is there something in there he's worried about? Has he dotted all his i's and crossed all his t's.
The Obama camp have all but imploded from his big mouth and now W did it. Blame everything on W Obama your campaign is clearly in trouble and you are looking for damage control. Yada, Yada, Yada!
Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | March 21, 2008 9:57 AM
Jerry: Read Orwell's 1984 and get back to us.
Posted by: a blinkin | March 21, 2008 10:18 AM
The only good that can come out of this is if the employees admit they were asked to do it by the Clinton campaign.
Other than that, I'm going to guess that Obama's three dirty words "typical white woman," are going to do him in.
You see, Americans want forgiveness for hundreds of years of slavery, Jim Crow, and subtle racism.
However, Americans are incapable of forgiving a black man uttering the words, "Typical White Woman."
Happy Easter.
Posted by: Bud McFarlin | March 21, 2008 10:23 AM
No wonder I have always associated the GOP with political dirty tricks. Once again... I was in high school during Watergate, and that made a lasting impression on me. Even if Clinton and Obama are the best the Dems can do this time around, I'll NEVER belong to the GOP.
Posted by: Emmy in Evanston | March 21, 2008 10:27 AM
Wow, Joe DiGenova (Mr. Victoria Toensing) being impartial and unbiased. Who'd a thunk it?
So maybe it's too late for State's IG to question the fired employees, but how about an independent prosecutor? And who was it who made the decision to fire the contractors? In other words, who bungled the operation? I'd suggest getting Condi up to the Hill to answer some questions, but I doubt she'd recall anything.
Also, to Amazed: a HUGE chunk of your government is contractors. That's what government is now. Doubtless they need access and security clearances to do their jobs.
Hey Mike, Bay and Mark, what exactly is in someone's passport files anyway?
Posted by: Vulture Breath | March 21, 2008 10:47 AM
In the last seven years, I have been to 6 carribbean nations, Italy and France twice each, England, Spain, and Greece once each, and I will be in Amsterdam in the fall. Now that everyone knows, shall I be outraged?
Posted by: David | March 21, 2008 10:59 AM
This is just a THEORY, OK? Since Obama is a public official, people don't need to look at his passport to see where he's been on official business. All you have to do is to check his itinerary during his term as an Illinois congressman or as an US Senator. So the only thing left is his private travel. My GUESS is that the Clinton people wanted to see if he has travelled somewhere with the Retzko family or anybody who is under investigation in the Retzko trial. Or to see if Obama was travel was paid by Retzko. By the way, don't blame the Republicans until we'll find out who the fired employees are.
Posted by: Bob | March 21, 2008 11:01 AM
Why isn't this a criminal investigation?
Posted by: Denisetoo | March 21, 2008 11:07 AM
this smacks of rovian/watergate type political tactics. journalists get off your butts and do your job. get the names of the individuals and do some investigating into their backgrounds using your resouces. an apology is not enough. this type of garbage is typical of rove. i don't believe he's out there doing nothing with a presidential campaign going on. this is illegal! if i should do something illegal i can expect to be arrested. not just fired or suspended.
Posted by: Carmen/texas | March 21, 2008 11:11 AM
What is the big deal unless Barack Hussein Obama has something to hide? Obama wants Clinton to release some past financial statements? Obama should release his passport files if he has nothing to hide!
Posted by: Clarence | March 21, 2008 11:26 AM
Jerry White - this is NOT about damage control or hiding things, this is about an illegal act performed by those who were granted "access" and then abused it. If this happened to Hillary or McCain, it would remain an illegal act no matter what, and an investigation should be carried out with punishments doled out to those who deserved it. Your dismissiveness of the true issues surrounding this suspicious act betrays acute ignorance on your part. Shame on you.
Posted by: dh1965 | March 21, 2008 11:37 AM
I seems that this administration has figured out how to cover up Watergate 2.
Blame and fire the thieves.
Spying on political adversaries for political motives last I heard was illegal, but damn, America has now accepted living under the age of surveillance for a while.
I wonder if people even know what civil liberties are anymore.
Posted by: Pablo | March 21, 2008 11:42 AM
You Rebublicans never change...I can't wait for November when all of you crooks and liars are ousted big time!
Posted by: Ed | March 21, 2008 11:50 AM
In the last seven years, I have been to 6 carribbean nations, Italy and France twice each, England, Spain, and Greece once each, and I will be in Amsterdam in the fall. Now that everyone knows, shall I be outraged?
Posted by: David | March 21, 2008 10:59 AM
No. You "shall" get your head out of your butt. Disclosing information voluntarily is a mite different than having it snooped without your knowledge. Even a half-wit like you should be able to piece that together.
Posted by: a blinkin | March 21, 2008 11:59 AM
Lots of uninformed opinions here. In comparison to many corporate breach incidents, The discovery/disclosure of this one was apparently exceptionally efficient (many incidents tend to take months) and many organizations don't even implement any monitoring applications at all, even for mitigating against breaches of particularly sensitive information. Also, from somewhat personal experience, I can say that many career civil servants in the State Dept. tend to "lean left", as opposed to "right", so I think that the notion of this incident being politically motivated is highly dubious. Finally, it's worth noting that, in our world of outsourcing, contractors have lots of autonomy and ability to access databases containing personal information. Unfortunately, this is the case in both public and private sectors.
Posted by: Alex | March 21, 2008 12:02 PM
How can anyone back Obama for lack of experience...Blah, Blah, Blah...How about this...Where are the idiots that supported Bush...whose only experience in the National Guard Reserve is responsible for the lifes of many brave soldiers dying for no reason. Give me a break you blind republicans.
Posted by: BoricuaSport | March 21, 2008 12:24 PM
I just looked at Jerry White's passport file..he is an idiot from Springfield
Posted by: John Montez | March 21, 2008 12:26 PM
Clinton and McCain's files were breached as well. So why did the Press only report that Obama's files were breached? Do you call it fair journalism? NO wonder the Trib (and other newpapers, except the Wall Street Journal) bleed money every quarter. You should be ashamed.
Posted by: Paul Frampton | March 21, 2008 12:26 PM
Passport applications contain only basic identity data--name, date of birth,ssn, address, emergency contacts etc. etc. Much ado about very little.
More interesting would be something the State Dept file does not contain: a detailed report on Obama's foreign travel, including specific dates. Even low ranking civil servants with access to classified information are required to furnish such data. The presumption of privacy ends when one asks to be elected to public office.
Posted by: john patrick | March 21, 2008 12:27 PM
Talking about incompetency and experience. Wasn't GOP presidential ancient and legendary candidate McCain who forgot the "Lyrics" the other day. I mean, I mean to say, Dah...!
Posted by: BoricuaSport | March 21, 2008 12:30 PM
It was revealed a short while ago that all 3 presidential candidates: McCain, Obama and Clinton's passport files were breached. So, folks, please don't jump to any conclusion yet. It could very well be "curiousity" for all we know.
Posted by: Matt | March 21, 2008 12:31 PM
Paul:
State only advised Clinton hers were breached today and State only at about noon Friday acknowledged that McCain's too were breached. Only the Obama case was known of Thursday night. No shame here, only breaking news.
Posted by: mark silva | March 21, 2008 12:33 PM
Uh Oh. looks like McCain and Clinton had the same thing done to them. Is it still a GOP conspiracy against the "greatest leader of our lifetime" as some dopes like to call Obama?
Posted by: northwest rob | March 21, 2008 12:34 PM
My guess is, since I've never seen any presidential candidate picked and plucked apart like this Obama fellow, is someone behind the snooping thought maybe they would find something incrimminating being that so many thinks he's Muslim and has ties to Muslim countries...
To me, a firing is not enough a full investigation should be executed. But since it is possible this may be tied to the GOP, I don't think that will happen, a firing such as what has happened is all that there will be.
Posted by: Oh Please | March 21, 2008 12:35 PM
Are you people not reading other news sources? THE PASSPORT FILES OF CLINTON AND MCCAIN HAVE ALSO BEEN BREACHED. Enough with making everything about "poor, victimized" Obama.
Posted by: VKaminsky | March 21, 2008 12:48 PM
For those who have wondered what exactly is in a passport file, well, it's a lot. And not what you might expect (records of where people have traveled).
Computerworld and Kos have good writeups on this. I don't think I can put URLs in these comments, so just google "What exactly is in a passport record" to find them.
Posted by: Brian Neale | March 21, 2008 12:49 PM
This is an outrage, but why should any of us be surprised with an administration that has no respect for the privacy or constitutional rights of its citizens? According to a retired state department employee who posted on another blog, it's not just that these employees had access to the files, they also had the ability to tamper with the information that is contained within the files as well.
Posted by: Martin | March 21, 2008 12:57 PM
OPEN YOUR RECORDS OBAMA,,,,,,,,YOUR PARANOIA IS SHOWING!
Posted by: FYI | March 21, 2008 1:14 PM
Lets have all three candidates release all the information in their passport files and end the drama.
Posted by: ejhickey | March 21, 2008 1:40 PM
What's Obama so afraid of? Has he been lying about his date and place of birth? That, plus address and SSN are about all these records contain.
Posted by: john patrick | March 21, 2008 1:53 PM
Don't forget Hillary when First Lady was going over Republican FBI files and the Clinton's had any enemy list turned over many names to IRS for audit. Take that Jackasses.Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | March 21, 2008 2:29 PM
The State's Dept. additional admission of Clinton and McCain passport breach is just a trick to dismiss their lack of responsibility and disrespect towards human rights. Only a fool or a GOP would fall for that. What a bunch of morons.
Posted by: BoricuaSport | March 21, 2008 2:32 PM
What is in a passport file? Is a Senator's passport file different than a private citizen's passport file? Why would someone want to look into their passport files? What information could they find that they can't find in public records?
Posted by: Callie | March 21, 2008 2:40 PM
For the record - ALL the candidates had their records looked at.
Posted by: Brian | March 21, 2008 3:07 PM
Where do we find out how much we pay contractors and if they are no-bid situations?
Posted by: Poet | March 21, 2008 3:38 PM
Where do we find out how much we pay contractors and if they are no-bid situations?
Posted by: Poet | March 21, 2008 3:38 PM
Clinton & McCain's files were also accessed so WHY the misleading headline???
Oh yeah, cuz it's all about Obama...sigh
Posted by: Wondering | March 22, 2008 9:58 AM