A major investigation is unfolding up and down the east coast to try to figure out who sent suspicious packages to high-profile Democratic politicians, a media outlet and others. And experts say a lot of hands could be involved in figuring out who is responsible.
"The FBI would have the oversight and the responsibility to conduct this kind of investigation not only because two of the targets were former government officials, but this is clearly a domestic terrorism incident, and the FBI has jurisdiction in those cases," said Ken Gude, a terrorism expert at the Center for American Progress.
As investigators work to figure out if — and how — the mailings are tied together, Gude says they are looking at very specific details.
"You're looking for how they sent — this seems to have gone through the mail. [Investigators are asking] are there similarities in packaging? Are there similarities in the method that was used? And then, once you look at the device itself, with something like this we have seen reports it's a crude but effective type of device, those kinds of systems can be easy to identify the similarities between one and another," Gude explained. "You can tell pretty quickly if this is something that matches the type of device that was used in another location, or [if] it's totally different."
Gude says there's still a lot we don't know and that early reports are often incorrect. He cautions people not to look at who is initially claiming responsibility. Oftentimes, he says, terror groups will use these incidents as a means to boost their own standing.
"We have to be very careful about those types of conclusions. It does seem that the targets are those who have been on the receiving end of the violent political rhetoric," Gude said. "We should look for what is the potential motive behind an attack like this, and that can help us understand what group is or what their motives were."
Though there were some errors in the details of the mail: Former CIA Director John Brennan's name was spelled wrong, and he doesn't work at CNN, where the device was delivered. And the device sent to Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz's office was addressed to former Attorney General Eric Holder.
Gude says those mistakes don't actually tell us much.
"What we have to focus on who they were intended to be received by, and that's the important thing for figuring out what the motives were," he added.
He says the investigation will go much further than just looking at the type of devices used: "[It's] common for all types of terror groups. I think if this target group is the full scope that would be an indicator."
As for those who say this is some sort of stunt that wasn't intended to cause serious harm to the targets — Gude isn't buying it.
"It seems no, based on the very limited information we have so far about these devices. The Secret Service will not be in line with making the public statement if there was any indication that this was not a real indication to inflict harm on the protectees," Gude explained. "We've seen that the advice was a crude but ultimately effective device. That's not what you do if you want to just create a sensation — you don't send devices that could go off."
Still, he says, even if the FBI does connect the attempted attacks and traces them through mail, there is still a possibility we may never know who specifically sent the packages.
