In the 1950s, the FBI used to boast that whenever the Communist Party or one of its front groups met, a majority of attendees were undercover FBI agents. The FBI already knew that the Communists were the enemy. Its infiltrators were there to disrupt and discredit them. Alas, today’s FBI places red-state conservatives in the same category once occupied by the Reds.
This is not to say that the FBI manufactures and runs pseudo-conservative groups so as to discredit conservatives. Not quite. In every way, its undercover agents are pale shadows of what they were in the ’50s. But involvement with infiltrated groups naturally tempts the FBI to control them and even to entrap them.
The FBI’s increasing preference for political action over bona fide investigations is part of its overall decadence — laziness, incompetence, and eagerness to integrate with the ruling class as much as the CIA. During my years with the Senate Intelligence Committee, I did my best to discourage this corrupt trend.
“Profiling” — socio-political formulae that foreordain the enemy — is the bureaucratic mechanism that ensures the Bureau sheds responsibility, stays on the right side of power, and saves intellectual effort. Like much of what the oligarchy does, it is based on what it claims is “social science” — read: what “everybody” at the A-list dinner party believes. Follow the correct profile and, though you may not always be right, you can never be wrong.
Why did the FBI pay attention to Martha Stewart and not to Jeffery Epstein? Why does it worry about “white supremacists” who have never been videoed burning down a city and not about BLM, whose members did? Perhaps because BLM’s leadership also received more than $1 billion in corporate donations? Why did the FBI crucify Richard Jewell for allegedly having planted a bomb at the 1996 Olympics, an error for which the U.S. government ended up having to pay him millions in damages? Why, contemporaneously with 9/11, when letters containing anthrax were mailed to various American public figures from a place frequented by the 9/11 hijackers, did the FBI refuse to consider that the main known source of weapons-grade anthrax — Iraq — was involved, and instead spent years incompetently trying to railroad American researchers, ending up having to pay damages and leaving the case unsolved?
Because the FBI’s long-standing profile indicts white, conservative Americans. …
This is nothing new. After the 2010 elections in which the Tea Party movement led a popular revolt that deprived the establishment of 63 House and seven Senate seats, the FBI infiltrated dozens of local Tea Party groups. Following my lectures to such groups throughout northern California at the time, a certain type of person I recognized from the FBI academy would ask me questions intended to elicit extremist remarks, or agreement with them. Conversation with them confirmed my impression that their buttocks probably bore the Bureau’s brand. …
Led by an FBI informant, the Proud Boys did not, in fact, storm the Capitol. But the presence there of two of its strays was enough to lend a whiff of reality to the narrative of right-wing conspiracy.
And they try to tell us that MAGA types caused the Capitol riot. Probably all undercover FBI, Antifa, BLM, John Sullivan’s lefty Insurgency USA, and some QAnon types. With the cooperation of undermanned cops who just opened the gates in some cases. And some left wing journalists to record it. Just a big left wing party really, with a few bewildered or disapproving MAGAs looking on.