[ckastner]

This isn't a case of a mistaken identity, the FBI found exactly the person they were looking for. It just turned out that said person wasn't a threat, after all.

I'd say determining that is exactly the point of an investigation. That fact that it ended well doesn't change the fact that the process happened, and was triggered by said person.

[gnfargbl]

It is true that the FBI found the person they were looking for, and that person was the terminus of their investigation. It is not true that the article author was investigated by the FBI. He was nothing more than a MacGuffin in the overall plot.

In this specific case, the security officer made the correct decision in having him leave out this detail from the clearance form. Makes for a good story, though.

[ckastner]

> It is true that the FBI found the person they were looking for, and that person was the terminus of their investigation. It is not true that the article author was investigated by the FBI; he wasn't

To me, these are the same, so I guess that's probably just my layman's view then.

[kayodelycaon]

They aren’t the same. There is a legal distinction. They were attempting to identify the source of a document.

After they found and identified who created it, the investigation was dropped before they investigated any particular person.

[mixmastamyk]

That’s what the word means. If they mean convicted, they should ask that instead.