Greg Gordon


Greg Gordon, investigative reporter for McClatchy Newspapers, discusses his article “FBI’s case against anthrax suspect rife with questions;” the government’s accidental court filing (since retracted) that claimed Bruce Ivins couldn’t have made the anthrax that killed five people in 2001; why the anthrax wasn’t really “weaponized;” and why the FBI’s circumstantial case against Ivins – from his supposedly misleading anthrax sample submission, to his fear of losing his funding and job – could be totally wrong.

MP3 here. (18:19)

Greg Gordon, an investigative reporter, has spent 33 years uncovering waste, fraud, abuse and misconduct in Washington.

Since joining McClatchy’s national staff in 2006, he has helped expose Wall Street’s role in the 2008 financial crisis, partisanship in the Justice Department and gaps in U.S. homeland security. In 2010, he and colleagues Kevin Hall and Chris Adams were honored as finalists for the Pulitzer Prize for their financial reporting, which included Gordon’s four-part series detailing Goldman Sachs’ selloff of tens of billions of dollars in securities backed by risky home mortgages while it secretly bet that a housing downturn would send the value of those securities plummeting.

In 2008, he, along with Margaret Talev and Marisa Taylor, won a McClatchy “President’s Award’’ and Scripps Howard’s Raymond Clapper Memorial Award for Washington reporting (Gordon’s second Clapper award) for exposing the Bush administration’s politicization of the Justice Department.

Earlier, Gordon spent 13 years with the Minneapolis Star Tribune and McClatchy, covering the prosecution of al-Qaida terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui and writing about asbestos in the workplace, money and politics, aviation, law enforcement and the environment. He also worked for The Detroit News’ Washington bureau and spent 18 years with United Press International, where he headed its Washington investigative team and won the 1983 Raymond Clapper award for coverage of an EPA scandal.

In 1990, he and co-author Ronald E. Cohen won Sigma Delta Chi’s gold medal for their book “Down to the Wire,” chronicling UPI’s financial collapse.

13 thoughts on “Greg Gordon”

  1. Sure raises a lot of questions, but EVERY time the govt. messes up it raises a lot of questions. Katrina, 911 etc… But that does not mean that it is a conspiracy, it just means the government is doing what they do best – fail.

    Of course his colleagues in Fort Detrick say that he could not have done it and point to some technicalities – the fact that the bioterrorism attack in USA was committed by a christian american, employed and armed by the government, who hated Islam and loved Israel is embarrassing. It is also embarrassing for the fort that they armed and enabled the terrorist, so of course they wanna say it was someone else.

    As for sending in samples, the man tried to get a colleague to send in his sample for him. And also sent the wrong samples to avoid detection. But in the end it became clear that the vial that the anthrax came from was the one he worked with.

    This guy had motive, means, expertise and hard evidence linking him to the bio-terrorism. And the attacks ended when he died. The only uncomfortable thing is that he was white, christian, pro-israel and anti-islam.

    1. Sorry but if it was just a case of mere "failure", they wouldn't be vehemently resisting an independent investigation. They're stonewalling, not "failing".

      BTW Ivins did not have the "means", there is no "hard evidence" linking him to anything, and the attacks ended long before he died. (And not having the means, for example, is not a mere "technicality", it's a show stopper).

      1. Oh but he did have the means. And the anthrax has been proven to have come from the vial RMR-1029 that he and only he worked on.

        As for independent investigations, when have the government ever approved of independent investigations of high profile police issues?

        1. Well who knows more about it, you, or his colleagues? His colleagues, including his boss, have publicly stated that he had neither the knowledge, the equipment or the ability to do a manufacturing operation like that COVERTLY.

          So are you going to claim that you know more about it than the guy's boss?

          Moreover, let's say for the sake of argument that you're right, and he really did do it "on the job". Well this poses the obvious question: Why the hell wasn't his boss fired? If a guy can go to work and instead of doing what he's supposed to be doing, he pursues a formidable, highly risky, illegal manufacturing operation and then launch a deadly bio-terror attack against the United States, and his boss is so irresponsible and/or incompetent that he knows nothing about what his people are doing, shouldn't his boss be at least reprimanded?

          Sorry Chumpy but you can't have it both ways.

          In fact if there will be no independent investigation of the anthrax affair and the FBI's handling of it, and the "official" version is to stand as is, then I demand that the whole supervisory staff at USAMRIID be fired if not also charged as accomplices.

    2. A lot of coincidences for a simple “mess up” regarding 9/11.

      Coupled with the fact that the only 2 individuals that we have viable proof of directly financing the 9/11 attacks transferring fund to Atta while he was in the US was the former ISI director Mahmud Ahmed and Bosnian SDA main board member Hasan Cengic which had extensive dealing in supporting Islamic militants on behalf of the CIA.

  2. dndn you wrote
    "the fact that the bioterrorism attack in USA was committed by a christian american, employed and armed by the government, who hated Islam and loved Israel is embarrassing. It is also embarrassing for the fort that they armed and enabled the terrorist, so of course they wanna say it was someone else"
    not quite a conspiracy when you include what Nelson wrote in response
    "So are you going to claim that you know more about it than the guy's boss?"

    seems to me like nobody asked the obvious question. what is the demogaphic of bruces boss and his belief system? whats the likeleyhood of 90% of the guys(including his boss)he works with being a member of that same end-of-times nuttier than squirell sh7t christian cult?

  3. Everyone please go see the work by Ryan Dawson on the anthrax. He predicted Ivin's death months before it happened. And you have to look at more than just who had access to anthrax but also who lied about it to connect it to Al Qaeda and who knew where to mail it from to implicate the Al Qaeda cells. Ivins was not in Florida or New Jersey at the time of the mailings. He was at work in Maryland though. In fact, no one person could have done them at the same times thus the idea of a lone nut doing this all by themselves is a stupid assumption from the start. It was obviously a team and obviously they wanted to blame Muslim terrorists since the notes directly said as much. Any Scientist would know the anthrax spores would be traced back to their labs. So a scientist would need to worry about that, a theif however wouldn't need to. Was there a blackmarket for anthrax that went astray? or were insiders working together with outsiders with the goal of connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda? Which is exactly what the government did even after knowing the anthrax was domestic and had nothing to do with al qaeda much less Iraq.

  4. Who benefitted from this attack, who had the means to do it, who claimed to have info about it, and had the knowledge of the location of the hijacker cells (that they lived next to) to help create the set up, and why Target leahy and Daschle, but send hoax anthrax to Miller and Fox News and who had the ames strain in Iowa destryoed? It appears to be the same to factions with their thumbs in every pie about the rest of 911. The same two factions who lied about Iraq and are currently lying about Iran. Black is white and white is black. So when a note says Allah is great death to america and Israel. What is the opposite of that? Praise America and Israel and death to Islam. The thing is one would have to know that the lies would fall apart in time so why say and do something so over the top?

  5. Well it is like lying about WMDs, they knew it was lies and they knew it would be discovered that there weren't any WMDs. The things is these people didn't care because they also knew it would be to late. Destroying Iraq was worth being busted with embarrassing propaganda because they also knew there wouldn't be any consequences for it and they were right about that. All the liars got promotions and fat high paying jobs despite being wrong about everything.

  6. Finally, the FBI's pathetic case against Bruce Ivins is beginning to unravel publicly. The FBI has presented no witnesses, no physical evidence, and no science. Their case is built on inaccurate assertions and flimsy innuendo.

    If the FBI has more support for its case against Ivins, they should make that information public. If not, they should admit (a) they don't know who committed the anthrax attacks, or (b) they do know but they don't want to say who it was. If there's any other possibility, I can't think of it.

    For those who want to follow this story in detail, the CASE CLOSED blog at .. . … provides a wealth of information, updated daily as new documents are released.

    The conclusion of the CASE CLOSED blog … IT WASN'T IVINS!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.