CAN WE TRUST THE FBI FOR THE TRUTH?

Share This:

The FBI has been reporting that the Las Vega Shooter, whose name I prefer not to mention, has no connection to terrorist groups. That could very well be true. He could be nothing more than a garden variety nut.

But I’m wondering why these reports were made less than 24 hours following the incident. Let’s be real here for a minute. The FBI could not have possibly done anything more than scratched the surface of the shooter’s background when they denounced his involvement with a terror group. Their denial was too fast.

Meanwhile, ISIS has taken credit for the attack and announced that the shooter was a recent convert to Islam. Again, maybe he was, and maybe he wasn’t. I certainly don’t expect ISIS to be truthful in making a confession as to their connections to the attack. And I am definitely not suggesting that because ISIS is calling the shooter a terrorist, we can assume that he was.

But the FBI acted so quickly to discredit even the possibility of the shooter having terrorist ties, that I can’t help but question the haste in their doing so.

The day following the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California in December 2015, the FBI was asked by a reporter at a press conference if the attack was terrorism.

David Bowdich, who headed the field office of the Los Angeles FBI, said, “It would be irresponsible and premature for me to call this terrorism. The FBI defines terrorism very specifically, and that is the big question for us, what is the motivation for this.” Talk about a dodge!

If the San Bernardino terrorist attack was obvious terrorism and the FBI agent in charge warned that it was too early to speculate, then why would it not be too early to speculate when almost 600 people are shot in a mass attack, 58 of whom died? Huh?

I’ve always been a “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” kinda gal. Why is it too early to recognize a glaring terrorist attack for what it is, but not too early to rule out a terrorist attack despite the fact that from all appearances it resembles terrorism?

Progressives don’t want attacks to be labeled as terrorism as it muddies the water for the gun-control debate. If the attack is identified as an Islamic terrorist attack, it damages the progressive narrative for gun control. But if it is definitely classified as a terrorist attack, it interferes in the theory that Islam is a religion of peace. The focus of the attack is on the threat of Islam and not guns.

It has been less than twenty-four hours since the deadliest mass shooting in America’s history, and our leading law enforcement is chiming in with their dismissal of possible terrorism.

Bluntly, if you don’t know enough about the terrorist or even if there were others involved, then you don’t have enough information to rule out anything. Who knows, in the crazy world of the Democrats, I’m surprised the Left isn’t suggesting that the shooter was working for the Russians.

Considering what we know about James Comey and his alliance with the Clintons and Obama, and considering what we know about Robert Mueller choosing Hillary Clinton campaign donors as investigators on his team to set up President Trump in the Russian non-story, I can honestly say that I don’t trust the FBI.

Let me repeat that! I don’t trust the FBI! It is a part of the establishment. They will choose the progressive, globalist agenda every single time.

Finding out the truth will take more than just a statement from the FBI. We simply can’t believe them.

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*