[American Thinker] But the history of this case leaves me with a big question: was the FBI attempting to run interference for Alec Baldwin? He is their kind of guy: a leftist darling and well known critic of public enemy number one, Donald Trump. Were they so determined to validate Baldwin’s testimony that they kept using ever more extreme tests to make the gun "misfire" until they broke it? Or is there an even darker explanation? Did they intentionally break the evidence knowing that tainted evidence — which the defense team couldn’t test — would jeopardize the case?
Such questions would have been unthinkable just eight years ago. But the FBI’s recent history with evidence makes one justifiably suspicious. We now know that they have destroyed evidence (Hillary Clinton laptops), hidden evidence (Hunter Biden and Seth Rich laptops), and falsified evidence (Kevin Clinesmith). That’s quite a history of evidence mismanagement by our premier law enforcement agency, no? Given that the FBI did not disclose any of those incidents itself, we’ve learned that suspicion of the FBI is warranted.
These incidents have taught us that FBI employees are not impartial enforcers of the law. They operate according to their own agenda. Understanding the motives of its people is critical in assessing the veracity of work products from the agency of "Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity." Asking, "Would they want to deceive us?" and "How could they be deceiving us?" has become necessary.
FBI bonus articles:
[American Thinker] January 20, 2024 'Our corrupt FBI: New Hampshire edition'
[Gateway] Judge Orders Release of Last Defendant in ‘Newburgh Four’ Case, Blasts FBI Role in Orchestrating its Own Terrorism Plots